DOJ-OGR-00013304.pdf

--- Page 1 --- **Document Extraction** **Case Information** * Case Number: 1:20-cr-00330-PAE * Document Number: 755 * Filed Date: 08/10/22 **Page Information** * Page Number: 26 of 262 **Transcript Excerpt** 1. fired if they don't. 2. MR. ROHRBACH: I think that would be the source of the obligation is that they would be a fireable offense against the company to be fraudulently obtaining insurance benefits for someone. But if the Court is not persuaded -- 3. THE COURT: I don't always find a case on point. 4. You're right, there's a basis to distinguish, but it's pretty directly on point; so I think it shows it would be hearsay in the absence of some verification or some nontruth basis for which you're offering. 5. MR. ROHRBACH: Then I think the government will just offer the other exhibit, your Honor. 6. THE COURT: Okay. 823. 7. MR. ROHRBACH: 823. 8. THE COURT: To the extent there was a relevance objection, I'll overrule the relevance objection. 9. MS. STERNHEIM: Your Honor, may I state it for the record even though I know you're ruling? 10. THE COURT: I'm sorry? 11. MS. STERNHEIM: I would like to state it for the -- in front of the jury. 12. THE COURT: Oh, yes, you can object and I'll overrule. 13. MS. STERNHEIM: Okay. 14. THE COURT: That's fine. 15. MR. ROHRBACH: Your Honor, the case I mentioned **Footer Information** * SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. * (212) 805-0300 * DOJ-OGR-00013304 **Note:** The image appears to be a partial transcript of a court proceeding, with the above text being the only visible portion.