Correspondence from Whelan to Tegeler Re: Expert List
Correspondence
December 12, 1991
2 pages
Cite this item
-
Case Files, Sheff v. O'Neill Hardbacks. Correspondence from Whelan to Tegeler Re: Expert List, 1991. 13d23bcb-a946-f011-877a-002248226c06. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/1e5f0de3-f8cb-40e1-82aa-f0e8fbcdeed7/correspondence-from-whelan-to-tegeler-re-expert-list. Accessed December 04, 2025.
Copied!
MacKenzie Hall
110 Sherman Street
Hartford, CT 06105
RICHARD BLUMENTHAL
ATTORNEY GENERAL
ll
FAX (203) 5323-5536
Office of The Attorney General Pel: 566-7173
State of Connegticut
Philip Tegeler, Esq.
Connecticut Civil Liberties Union
32 Grand Street
Hartford, CT 06106
R 3)
Sheff v. O'Neill
Dear Phil:
In order to establish a basis for beginning the depositions
of the individuals who you have identified as plaintiffs' expert
witnesses, we would appreciate it if you would provide us with an
up-to-date list identifying those of your witnesses who have
completed all of the work they intend to do to prepare and speak
about the opinions they intend to offer at trial. My point in
making this request is to be sure that we do not find out during
the course of the deposition that the expert plans to do
additional work which would make it necessary for us to continue
the deposition until that work is completed, and that we do not
find out at trial that your expert relied on new or different
facts and information to substantiate his or her opinions.
We are especially concerned that at least some of your
expert witnesses may be relying on information, including
information about Hartford and the suburban school districts,
which we asked ycu to identify in response to the defendants’
first set of interrogatories, but which you have not yet provided
to us. To the extent that any of your expert witnesses will rely
on the information sought by way of our interrogatories which you
have not yet compiled and/or provided to us, it would be a waste
of time and effort to take their depositions before your experts
have that information and you provide us with full and final
responses to our interrogatories.
It seems to me that the depositions of at least some of your
expert witnesses will have to be put off until you provide us
with complete and up-to-date answers to our interrogatories. The
depositions of witnesses who have no further work to do and who
will not be relying on information which you will be supplying to
Philip Tegeler, Esq.
December 11, 1991
Page 2
us in supplemental responses to our interrogatories should be
able to move forward in the near future.
We look forward to hearing from you on this matter.
Very truly yours,
RICHARD UMENTHAL
ATTORNEY GENERAL
JRW/mu / /
cc: All Counsel of Record A