Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2. City of Renton's Opposition to Tracfone's Motion to Preclude Ashpaugh Testimony1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 {KZS2363427.DOCX;2/07851.000003/ } CITY’S OPPOSITION TO TRACFONE’S MOTION TO PRECLUDE TESTIMONY OF GARTH T. ASHPAUGH - 1 OGDEN MURPHY WALLACE, P.L.L.C. 901 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3500 Seattle, Washington 98164-2008 Tel: 206.447.7000/Fax: 206.447.0215 BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER OF THE CITY OF RENTON RE: TracFone Wireless, Inc. Administrative Appeal RESPONDENT CITY OF RENTON’S OPPOSITION TO TRACFONE’S MOTION TO PRECLUDE TESTIMONY FROM EXPERT WITNESS GARTH ASHPAUGH I. INTRODUCTION The City of Renton (“the City”) opposes Appellant TracFone Wireless, Inc.’s (“TracFone”) Motion to Preclude Testimony from Witness Garth T. Ashpaugh (“Motion”) as an expert witness in this proceeding. TracFone’s Motion neglects Mr. Ashpaugh’s relevant expertise and the essential purpose of an Administrative Hearing, that is, to provide the parties a full and fair opportunity to present relevant evidence. II. STATEMENT OF THE FACTS The City retained Garth T. Ashpaugh for his expertise and experience in the telecommunications and utilities arena. Indeed, he has testified as an expert in telecommunications cases across the country, including Oregon, New Mexico, and Louisiana. Ashpaugh is also a licensed Certified Public Accountant in Florida (#0023193), Missouri (#007098), and a member of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. See Declaration of Garth T. Ashpaugh in Support 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 {KZS2363427.DOCX;2/07851.000003/ } CITY’S OPPOSITION TO TRACFONE’S MOTION TO PRECLUDE TESTIMONY OF GARTH T. ASHPAUGH - 2 OGDEN MURPHY WALLACE, P.L.L.C. 901 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3500 Seattle, Washington 98164-2008 Tel: 206.447.7000/Fax: 206.447.0215 of The City of Renton’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment, ¶¶ 2-3 & Ex. 1. His experience with the telecommunications industry spans decades, dating back to the early 1980’s and the divestiture of AT&T in the various so-called “baby bells” (e.g., Pacific Northwest Bell, Bell South, etc.). Id at ¶ 2. Mr. Ashpaugh has been engaged in utility matters and regulation full-time for over twenty years. Id at ¶ 2. Moreover, he has been a consultant since 1991 and worked as an Audit Supervisor with the Missouri Public Service Commission. His primary focus with A&S is working for local governments on telecommunications and franchise matters. Id at ¶ 2. Furthermore, over the course of his career, Mr. Ashpaugh has conducted numerous audits of various utilities (e.g., gas, electric, water, wastewater, telecommunications, etc.), including audits of other prepaid wireless companies like TracFone Wireless, Inc. (“TracFone”), namely Cricket and NextTel (d/b/a Boost) for Lincoln, Nebraska. Id at ¶ 3. He is familiar with the business model of prepaid wireless companies who purchase or lease excess wireless service (also known as airtime and Commercial Mobile Radio Services (“CMRS”)) from network carriers (e.g., AT&T, T-Mobile/Sprint, Verizon, etc.) at wholesale and then resell the wireless service at retail to end users (also known as subscribers or customers). Id at ¶ 3. TracFone’s attempt to diminish Mr. Ashpaugh’s relevant experience is a thinly veiled effort to exclude helpful and pertinent analysis necessary to this Hearing and should be dismissed in full. III. ARGUMENT TracFone argues that Mr. Ashpaugh’s testimony should be excluded. To support this position, TracFone cites federal case law, Washington case law, and the Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 702: An expert witness may provide opinion testimony if : (1) the testimony is based upon sufficient facts or data; (2) the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods; and (3) the expert has reliably applied the principles and methods to the facts of the case. Fed. R. Evid. 702; Sundance, Inc. v. DeMonte Fabricating Ltd., 550 F.3d 1356, 1360 (Fed.Cir. 2008). TracFone’s Motion to Preclude Testimony of Garth Ashpaugh, at p. 5. Throughout its Motion, TracFone relies heavily on the more stringent Federal Rules of Evidence to support its proposition that Mr. Ashpaugh’s testimony should be precluded. While Mr .Ashpaugh has in fact testified as an 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 {KZS2363427.DOCX;2/07851.000003/ } CITY’S OPPOSITION TO TRACFONE’S MOTION TO PRECLUDE TESTIMONY OF GARTH T. ASHPAUGH - 3 OGDEN MURPHY WALLACE, P.L.L.C. 901 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3500 Seattle, Washington 98164-2008 Tel: 206.447.7000/Fax: 206.447.0215 expert on these topics in Federal Court, that is not the standard that should be applied here. TracFone selectively relies on more stringent standard, and wholly disregards the fact that administrative hearings proceed under significantly relaxed rules of evidence. See, e.g., RCW 34.05.452(2) (rules of evidence are “guidelines” under Administrative Procedure Act). Indeed, by their own provisions, the rules of evidence apply only to court proceedings. ER 101, 1101. In administrative hearings, evidence of any kind is admissible if, “in the judgment of the presiding officer it is the kind of evidence on which reasonably prudent persons are accustomed to rely in the conduct of their affairs.” RCWA 34.05.452(1). See also, Nisqually Delta Ass'n v. City of DuPont, 103 Wn.2d 720, 733, 696 P.2d 1222, 1229 (1985) (even relevant hearsay is admissible in administrative hearings). Accordingly, TracFone’s application of inappropriate case law and legal standards to preclude Ashpaugh’s testimony should be disregarded. Moreover, the Renton Municipal Code highlights the informal nature of these proceedings, and the importance of providing each party with a full and fair opportunity to present their case: APPEALS TO HEARING EXAMINER: 1. Format of the Appeal Hearing: The appeal hearing will be of an informal nature, but organized so that testimony and other evidence can be presented efficiently. RMC 4-8-100(E)(1) (emphasis added). The City has reasonably relied on Mr. Ashpaugh’s analysis and expertise, and believes his testimony is both efficient and helpful to understanding the issues present in this case. Mr Ashpaugh’s experience in telecommunication spans several decades. He has presented expert testimony in Federal Court on matters relating to telecommunications and is familiar with the business model of prepaid wireless companies who purchase or lease excess wireless service. Contrary to TracFone’s assertions that Mr. Ashpaugh’s testimony will be offered as “legal opinion,” the City intends to offer Mr. Ashpaugh’s testimony about the telecommunications industry and how 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 {KZS2363427.DOCX;2/07851.000003/ } CITY’S OPPOSITION TO TRACFONE’S MOTION TO PRECLUDE TESTIMONY OF GARTH T. ASHPAUGH - 4 OGDEN MURPHY WALLACE, P.L.L.C. 901 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3500 Seattle, Washington 98164-2008 Tel: 206.447.7000/Fax: 206.447.0215 TracFone’s business model fits within that industry. TracFone cannot exclude his testimony just because it disagrees with his opinions. IV. CONCLUSION The City opposes TracFone’s request that the Hearing Examiner enter an order precluding the City from calling Mr. Ashpaugh to testify as an expert witness in this proceeding. TracFone’s request neglects Mr. Ashpaugh’s relevant expertise and the aim of an administrative hearing under the RMCs and should therefore be denied. DATED this 12th day of February 2021. OGDEN MURPHY WALLACE, PLLC By /s/Kari L. Sand Kari L. Sand, WSBA #27355 Julia Norwood, WSBA #52876 Attorneys for Respondent City of Renton ksand@omwlaw.com 901 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3500 Seattle, WA 98164-2008 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 {KZS2363427.DOCX;2/07851.000003/ } CITY’S OPPOSITION TO TRACFONE’S MOTION TO PRECLUDE TESTIMONY OF GARTH T. ASHPAUGH - 5 OGDEN MURPHY WALLACE, P.L.L.C. 901 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3500 Seattle, Washington 98164-2008 Tel: 206.447.7000/Fax: 206.447.0215 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Kenya Owens, an employee of Ogden Murphy Wallace, PLLC, certify that on the date below, I filed and served the Respondent City of Renton’s Opposition of Tracfone’s Motion to Preclude the Testimony of Witness Garth T. Ashpaugh via email on the following parties: TracFone Wireless, Inc. Scott Edwards Lane Powell, PC 1420 5th Avenue, Suite 4200 Seattle, WA 98101 EdwardsS@LanePowell.com Grant S. Degginger Lane Powell, PC 1420 5th Avenue, Suite 4200 Seattle, WA 98101 DeggingerG@LanePowell.com I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed at Seattle, Washington this 12th day of February, 2021. /s/Kenya Owens Kenya Owens Legal Assistant