Thread by @asanderford

About to get started with the first hearing in dueling lawsuits about one of eight groping allegations that jostled the final month of #Nebraska’s GOP primary election for governor.

At the Gage County Courthouse for the hearing in Johnson County District Court. Will try & tweet.

Johnson County District Court Judge Rick Schreiner is expected to hear five motions today, four from the legal team for former gubernatorial candidate Charles Herbster, who is not yet attending, and one from lawyers for Republican State Sen. Julie Slama, who is.

The motions relate to the discovery process for uncovering information in civil cases.

Judge: This is a Johnson County District Court hearing in Gage County. This is something we do all the time. Was supposed to hear a Pawnee County case today here. Judge said he's trying to fit this into his schedule. Warns of expanded media coverage and microphones being on.

Judge: First up is the answer to counterclaim.

Herb lawyer Becker is talking about her ability to amend her response to the lawsuit and counter-claim.

Slama lawyer Dave Lopez is arguing they have the right to amend.

Judge grants ability to amend. Moving on.

Second motion.

Becker is arguing that a tweet Slama's account sent sharing a photograph of Slama wearing a dress she said she wore when she was sexually assaulted should be added into evidence. Slama's lawyer, Lopez, is objecting on a lack of authentication that it is genuine.

Becker: Arguing that additional use of the term "sexual assault" is libelous and defamatory. Says he can make sure the items are authenticated during discovery.

Lopez obecting. Now judge is asking Slama legal team to put forward their evidence they want to add.

Marnie Jensen is Slama's other lawyer.

Judge is asking lawyers whether the statements in earlier filings were in plain language and short.

Lawyers for Herbster and Slama essentially say their filings are.

Lopez: All of the additional information added to Herbster's claim are still dealing with the defamation claim.

Becker: There has been a change in the nature of the allegations. If they have a defense to it, then they can assert their defense of truth. There are examples of people being held liable by people because of their attorneys. Statements made by Depp's counsel led to liability.

Becker: There was an easy way to avoid that, don't make statements to the press. Don't issue press releases. (Herbster and his political team spoke to the press outside of the court about the allegations.)

Judge says he will take it under advisement and accept briefs from lawyer about objection.

Lopez: Herbster's team, I believe, made a similar legal argument in their original filing. Those extrajudicial statements were allowed and perhaps even mandated. Happy to brief if needed

Motion No. 3, Herbster's motion to quash and a protective order. Becker: Offering exhibits filed in May.

Jensen (Slama lawyer): I have many objections. (Asking to see the filings. They're looking now.)

Jensen: The affidavit of Ellen Keast, former campaign manager for Herbster, I object on the basis of relevance, lack of foundation on paragraphs 4 and 5. The entire affidavit is hearsay. Lack of relevance with 4 and 5. Paragraph 4, 5, object on relevance, hearsay and speculation.

Jensen: Also have objections on Herbster's affidavit, says reject entire affidavit on lack of foundation and evidence, hearsay.

Jensen: Also want to point out that Senator Slama has been unable to depose Mr. Herbster to date. Can't test the veracity. Ask that it not be accepted until he's willing to be cross-examined.

Becker: Everyone knew it was the last week of the campaign. A candidate for the Republican governorship is not going to be able to sit for a deposition in the last week of the campaign. Judge: Can he be deposed?

Becker: Counsel is saying they need two days for Mr. Herbster's deposition. This is in an incident which we denied occurred. Judge: Is there a rule that exists that prohibits the taking of his deposition?

Becker: At this point we have the general right that we could move for a protective order to limit harassment and oppression.

Judge: You were complaining that it was the end of the campaign. You wanted all the pleadings to be completed. What rule limits his deposition being taken? Becker: There is no rule.

Becker: We want to avoid the risk of having to come back here for multiple depositions.

Jensen: (on motion to quash) I think the objection is much more thorough. Exhibit 1. Let me clearly answer the court's question. There is no Nebraska rule of discovery that prohibits the taking of Mr. Herbster's deposition, either for when it was noticed for May 6 or now.

Jensen: Rule 6330 says on the commencement of a proceeding. I simply cannot, I have to respond to Mr. Becker's vigorous argument that in the heat of a campaign Mr. Herbster could not participate in the action which he filed in the heat of his campaign.

Judge: I'm here to litigate a legal matter. I care not about a political campaign or the time it will take to do this. If you have legal arguments, I will hear them.

Jensen: It's June 14. He did not appear on May 6. I want to make one legal argument. Exhibit 1 authenticates a series of correspondence. The dates matter here. Notice was sent to Herb counsel on April 25, upon notice being issued. Acknowledged by both lawyers on April 26.

Jensen: Between April 26, when we know that counsel for Herbster had the notice and the filing of this motion to quash on May 5, there was no communication by any of Mr. Herbster's counsel to indicate that he would not be hearing. I spent the 11 days preparing for a deposition.

Jensen: Either deny it outright. Or I would simply just encourage the court to set the motion aside, deny it with leave. I anticipate after having the opportunity to depose Mr. Herbster, there may be an effort to seek sanctions for his failure to appear.

Jensen: The attachments included with Exhibit 1 that are D-G, are communications between me and counsel for Mr. Herbster. These began after the filing for this motion.

Jensen: We assumed the court would want us to work together. Sent an email saying we're going to have a motion hearing. Would you work with us on an agreeable day and time and location? May 20.

Judge: How is this supporting your argument on motion to quash? Jensen: I don't want to have to counter a straw man.

Judge: Overruling the motion to quash. Mr. Becker what would you propose in a protective order on this matter? Becker: I ask for deposition to be quashed because of campaign schedule. A common sense practical approach.

Becker: I think it's appropriate to have these pleadings framed before depositions. Get the pleadings narrowed and framed, some exchange of written documents. Judge: I think we discussed earlier that that's not required. Becker: It's not required by any rule. We are asking.

Judge: Have you met and conferred with opposing counsel to discuss those conditions? Becker: No we have not your honor. Judge: I don't think it's required by the discovery rules at this point.

Judge: Ordering counsel to meet and confer on depositions and protective order. Overruling motion to quash. The lawyers that practice in front of me 99 percent of the time can get together and act like professionals.

Judge: Meet and confer on that protective order and if you still have an issue bring it to me.

Judge: Motion No. 4. Becker: I don't think this case should be tried in the media. I don't think counsel should be issuing press releases. Worried about attorneys becoming a witness. I believe it's not appropriate to litigate in the press. (Herbster has talked in the press.)

Jensen: Exhibits A-G are just seven of the statements made by Herbster and his agents made in the press about this that we were frankly required to respond to. That comment talks about not only when statements by counsel are permitted but when they may in fact be required.

Jensen: That is the situation that was present in this particular case. We also wish to not try our case in the press. What I will say with respect to that is these are just seven statements made by the plaintiff which were made just before or contemporaneously to the filings.

Jensen: We had to make statements to counter the prejudice that may have occurred. Particularly where Sen. Slama herself is a public figure. She faces her own reelection in 2024, which the campaign may have already begun.

Jensen: At the end of the day, 3.6 actually permits, encourages and requires the type of leveling of the playing field that occurred here. No basis for a protective order when both parties are making statements in the press.

Jensen: Every statement by Senator Slama was in response to a statement from Herbster.

Judge: 251 pages, most appear to be press releases couching as court filings. It's hard to navigate this corner of the world without running across those. Get back to the short and plain statements required by the rules. Could reduce a lot of the arguments we are having here.

Judge: I will consider the protective order. Brief that and I will take that under advisement.

Now moving onto the fifth motion, this one from Slama's legal team.

Judge is getting the lawyers from both sides a room to confer right now, trying to make this push for subpoenas to go more quickly.

Will be back in a bit.

By the way, Boecker is how he spells his last name, not Becker. What I get for tweeting too quickly.

Still waiting.

Just walking back in.

Judge: Conferred for about an hour. Lopez: We made substantial progress on items under subpoena. Hopefully will be trading some language that may dispose of this for the court. We propose the court set this aside for a future hearing or continue it. It may well be rendered moot.

Lopez: I'm hopeful we will get there. Hopeful we will get the matter resolved before we have to be back to court.

Judge: I appreciate the effort. I know it was highly contentious. I said you could. You've proven me correct.

Judge: I just want to help both of you usher this case through the system civilly and efficiently if I can. I need to set a date. But I don't want to rush you.

Lopez: We still need to set a date for our motion to enter into default judgment on the counter claims. Also believe that the court may have to deal with disagreements about written evidence. A motion or two might be right on motion to compel.

Lopez: Let's put it all together in one hearing. Judge: Going to be better if you talk to my bailiff. I'd like to get this back to Johnson County so I can give you an afternoon if need be. "On this, work it it out." You've spent an hour and made tremendous progress.

Judge: I don't want to get sidetracked by issues that aren't in front of me.

Boecker: Yes sir.

Judge: How much time do you think it would take to do briefs?

Jensen: Discussed offering the court consolidated briefs at the same time, due July 1, a single response due July 15.

Judge: Briefs simultaneous July 1. Response from each party, July 15. Let's keep focused on the issues that bring us here and initially caused the fight. The side issues are taking up time that keep us from solving true legal disputes. We are adjourned.

@threadreaderapp Please unroll

Story to come on @NE_Examiner.