OH WAIT! NOW, I REMEMBER!
Brownv. Reinauer Transp. Cos., L.P., 788 F. App'x 47 (2dCir. 2019).
By:Daniel Olivier
The issue before the United States Court of Appeals,Second Circuit, is whether a party may offer, in opposition to a summaryjudgment motion, an affidavit that contradicts the party’s previous depositiontestimony. The Second Circuit held that the appellant’s affidavit contradictedhis own prior testimony and affirmed the district court’s motion for summaryjudgment in favor of the respondent.
Initially, Brown, the plaintiff, filed suit in theEastern District of New York alleging negligence pursuant to the Jones Act[1] and unseaworthiness undergeneral maritime law. While aboard the Defendant’s vessel, Brown slipped duringinclement weather. In the course of his deposition, he testified that he had notheory as to why he slipped. Brown stated that he was in the contested area forabout an hour and did not see any ice that needed to be salted. Brown later submittedan affidavit stating that the ship’s deck was “very slippery”[2] due black ice and animproperly painted deck. Ultimately, the district court concluded that Brown’saffidavit was inadmissible because it contradicted his prior depositiontestimony, and as a result, Brown failed to sufficiently state a claim.
On appeal, Brown contested the district court’sconclusion that he was unable to explain the cause of his fall or present anyevidence as to the existence of a dangerous condition. The Second Circuitreviewed well-settled law that “a party may not create an issue of fact bysubmitting an affidavit in opposition to a summary judgment motion that, byomission or addition, contradicts the affiant’s previous deposition testimony.”[3] In addition, the courtnoted two exceptions to this rule: (1) when the issue is not fully explored inthe deposition or (2) when the affidavit statements are corroborated by otherevidence.
However, the court reasoned that Brown gave contradictoryinformation regarding the snowstorm, the snow clearing, and the condition ofthe deck in his deposition testimony. The Second Circuit concluded that Brown’sargument lacked merit and agreed with the district court’s conclusion that thecontradictory affidavit was inadmissible. The court affirmed the districtcourt’s motion to grant summary judgment in favor of Reinauer.
[1] 46 U.S.C. § 30104 (2018).
[2] Brown v. Reinauer Transp. Cos., L.P., 788 F. App'x 47 at *6 (2d Cir. 2019).
[3] Brown v. Reinauer Transp. Cos., L.P., 788 F. App'x 47 at *4 (2d Cir. 2019).
