affidavit. Almost all affidavits submitted in litigation are drafted by the lawyers rather than by the affiants and a comparison of the diction of Russell’s deposition with that of the affidavit makes clear that his affidavit is no exception.” (internal citations omitted)). Some federal courts have adopted a particularly robust version of the sham affidavit doctrine, holding that, whenever a subsequent affidavit contradicts prior deposition testimony, it should be disregarded. See Buckner v. Sam’s Club, Inc., 75 F.3d 290, 292-93 (7th Cir.1996) (“The concern in litigation ... is that a party will first admit no knowledge of a fact but will later come up with a specific recollection that would override the earlier admission.”); Adams v. Greenwood, 10 F.3d 568, 572 (8th Cir.1993) (<HOLDING>); Jones v. General Motors Corp., 939 F.2d 380,
holding that an affidavit denying what is established by ones own evidence  does not preclude summary judgment holding an order denying a motion for summary judgment is interlocutory and not appealable holding that a court may not consider hearsay contained in an affidavit when ruling on a summary judgment motion holding that unsupported contentions do not preclude summary judgment holding a single conversation to be sufficient evidence of dissolution to preclude summary judgment