Mandy Navarra Affidavits

Is this the first amta case that involves both a plaintiff and defense affidavit? Because that’s a pretty interesting choice to make.

No, it is not. I don't know how many times it has happened before, but I do know for sure that for 2010-11 (Davis v. Happyland Toy Co.), the CEO of Happyland, Blake Lexington, became a swing for Nats (back before they didn't do a separate Nats case). If the plaintiff called him, he had been fired from Happyland and was super bitter; if the defense called him, he would still be the CEO.

I'm sure it has happened in other cases as well, but that one stuck out in my mind when I saw that Navarra had two affidavits.

The last one I remember was Bancroft/Covington in 2015-16, they had a personal assistant witness (Corey Hyde) with P/D affidavits, and I believe it was for the entire season. It's definitely been a while though. My recollection is the witness was mostly the same on each side but with a few different quotes/observations that benefited their chosen side.

For the people who are familiar with these cases--was there a reason for the P affadavit D affadavit besides the fact swap? I think it's pretty clear in this case the call was made to avoid skirting the hostile portrayal rule with Navarra on defense. It seems like a pretty strange call with any other case though--why not just have two different witnesses?