On February 11, Marilyn Marks' attorney filed a brief in opposition to the City of Aspen motion for a protective order to prevent a deposition of TrueBallot Inc., the company which tabulated the May 5, 2009 election for the City of Aspen. That response is found here, below the break.
The five subject matters on which the Plaintiff seeks to depose TBI, which are set out in the Statement of Facts, supra at 3, are directly relevant under Rule 26(b)(1) to two key defenses offered by the Defendant in this action.
III. The Defendant has failed to establish annoyance, embarrassment, undue burden or expense that outweighs the Plaintiff’s interest in discovery of material facts. The Defendant suggests that the Plaintiff’s request “is designed for the sole purpose to annoy or embarrass” the Defendant. (Def.’s Mem. Supp. Mot. Protect. Order at 6.) She further argues that the expense of participating in the proposed deposition “is an undue burden or expense within the meaning of Rule 26(c).” (Id.)