Court Opinion

ID: 9725647
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 11:57:56.448291+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:25:17.519541
License: Public Domain

VANDE WALLE, Chief Justice,
concurring specially.
[¶28] As the majority opinion notes, Owens-Coming Fiberglass Corporation objected to allowing Richard Anderson to use a transcript of Dr. Barry Castleman’s testimony in another case rather then testifying in person because Castleman was unavailable. See Crowston v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., 521 N.W.2d 401 (N.D.1994) (affirming trial courts exclusion of deposition testimony under N.D.R.Evid. 804(b)(1) because deponents were not unavailable within meaning of N.D.R.Evid. 804(a)(5) merely because they were not residents of North Dakota.) I agree that issue is not raised by Owens-Coming in this appeal.