LYNN – A deposition gone awry on March 7 is now the basis of two separate filings at Salem Superior Court in the ongoing battle between the city and local bar owners over the rollback of hours from 2 a.m. to 1 a.m.City attorney Vincent Phelan said the city filed a motion for a protective order Monday because bar attorneys Frederick Riley and Joseph Dever overstepped their boundaries during a deposition of Lynn Police Chief John Suslak on Friday.Also frustrated by the turn of events, Riley and Dever filed a motion for future cooperation during the next deposition and for the city to pay the cost of the aborted deposition to their clients.The city made an attempt to postpone today’s deposition for Clancy but was rejected by Judge Maureen Hogan who ordered it to take place under the same strict limits as Suslak’s.Hogan also reiterated that the questioning would be limited to only open meeting law violations questions.Phelan initially said the postponement was meant to iron things out so that the same situation that happened with Suslak wouldn’t happen again with Clancy, but said he was pleased that Hogan once again imposed the same limits.The ongoing issue stems from the unanimous decision by the Licensing Board in December to rollback bar hours, which went into effect Jan. 2.Riley and Dever allege open meeting law violations occurred during the first public hearing on Oct. 2. Two other hearings were also held – one ordered by the court in November to correct open meeting law allegations and a third in December that ultimately sealed the bars’ fate.In February, Hogan said only questions pertaining to the open meeting law violations could be asked during depositions of Suslak, Mayor Edward J. Clancy Jr., and Licensing Board members Richard Coppinger, Michael Phelps and John F. Pace.But Phelan said the deposition was quickly halted after several questions were asked that had nothing to do with the open meeting law violation.”It was a discovery order and the judge’s orders were very specific as to what (Riley and Dever) could and could not talk about, yet they decided to ask very specific questions that were in violation of the order,” he said. “So now we’re going back to court.”Phelan said Dever asked Suslak who helped him prepare documents that were presented at a public hearing, but the question was objected to because it wasn’t relevant.”I think it was intentional and I think (Riley and Dever) are waging this in the eyes of the public and not the court’s,” he said.Riley disagreed, saying the questions were allowed because an amended complaint had been filed and accepted in court several weeks ago that broadened the range of questioning.”We did what the judge told us to do, but when we asked the chief to tell us the substance of conversations that he had with the mayor, Chairman Coppinger and the other members of the Licensing Board, his lawyer (George Markopoulos) refused to let him answer the questions,” he said. “(Markopoulos) also refused to let the chief answer questions about conversations about the rollback that the chief admitted occurred between Deputy Chief (Kevin) Coppinger and Board Chairman (Richard) Coppinger.”Riley said it became increasingly difficult to ask questions during the deposition and said Markopoulos and Phelan attempted to obscure it in their favor.”They just kept objecting and inserting themselves into the record on numerous occasions,” he said. “I’m sure they will dispute the amendment and it will start the fight all over again, but the court will see that in the deposition.”Phelan said he just wants the whole situation to come to a close.”All we want to do is stop this and get it over with,” Phelan said. “We tried to have them just go over the common ground questions that we could answer, but they said no. That’s why I thought it was staged.”Riley said the case is far from over.”This is going to be a fight and the economic loss of our clients so far is horrendous,” Riley said. “It would be my desire