(p175-176)

• MR. FOSTER: And just to be clear, Your Honor, the issue was that there was testimony where Mr. Tivilini was talking about the account value enhancement and that the company would have to actually fulfill the account value enhancement. The parties had agreed that none of that testimony would come in, so it was erroneously included with the video -- from a technical issue.
• MR. MARTENS: So talking to my team, I think we are comfortable with going ahead and playing the video. To the extent there's deviations, I think we're comfortable that they're not going to be prejudicial to us.
• THE COURT: Well, if there's one specific subject matter, I can simply advise them to disregard.
• ...
• THE COURT: Ladies and gentlemen, apparently as
  the videotape was cut, it didn't reflect the parties' agreed designations. You heard testimony concerning an account value enhancement. The parties had agreed that that was not going to come in, so whatever you heard about account value enhancement you are to disregard.

2014 0423 – DOC 812 – Trial Transcript – Day 10 – Walker v LSW – 194p

• 2013 1211 – DOC 735-2 : Deposition of Michael Tivilini- Walker v LSW – 215p