Today&#39;s roundup of new deposition-related cases focuses on four rulings. One offers a great strategy to exclude hostile deponents&#39; deposition testimony, where they answer your opponents&#39; questions but refuse to let you fully and fairly cross-examine them. A second touches on the age-old question of whether &#34;Form!&#34; or &#34;Objection!&#34; is enough or whether you must articulate the specific evidentiary basis. The third offers an idea for administering a slightly modified oath to immature deponents who might not understand the standard oath. The fourth looks at a novel approach one party took in noticing an individual witness with an attached, lengthy 30(b)(6) list of topics relating to matters that seemed better suited for a corporate representative.Thanks for listening! And be sure to check out the book upon which this podcast is based, 10,000 Depositions Later: The Premier Litigation Guide for Superior Deposition Practice. Available on Amazon and almost everywhere else books are sold. Now in it&#39;s fourth edition at 600 pages. It&#39;s a career-saving resource.SHOW NOTESPerrot v. Kelly, et al., Case No. 18-cv-10147, 2023 WL 11873009 (D. Mass. October 27, 2003) (reserving right to exclude deponent&#39;s testimony if witness continued to thwart plaintiff&#39;s opportunity to fully and fairly examine her, under FRE 804 relating to witness &#34;unavailability&#34;; court appears to equate refusal to give testimony with unavailability)B.P., et al. v. City of Johnson City, et al., No. 2:23-cv-71-TRM-JEM, 2024 WL 3461408 (E. D. Tenn. July 18, 2024) (refusing to limit lawyer to word &#34;Objection&#34; during depositions, and stating that lawyers have obligation to state the specific basis for the objection and not limit it to &#34;objection&#34; or &#34;form&#34; alone; further declining to sanction lawyer for longer narrative objections about incomplete documents because they were not intended to coach witness as to a particular answer)People v. Lopez, 550 P.3d 731 (Ct. App. Colo 2024) (affirming conviction of criminal defendant over objection that trial judge conducted modified administration of oath to 10-year old witness; finding that modified oath is appropriate for an immature witness who may not understand standard oath)Jacobs, et al. v. Journal Publishing Company, et al., Case No. 21-690-MW/SCY, 2024 WL 3401048 (D. N. M. July 12, 2024) (rejecting plaintiffs&#39; effort to depose individual by serving FRCP 30(b)(6)-style deposition notice with lengthy attached topic list)See, 30(b)(6)-style Deposition Notice Served on Individual, PACER CM/ECF Doc. No. 135-1 (showing notice with attached topic list and list of documents to be brought by individual deponent) Jacobs, et al. v. Journal Publishing Company, et al., Case No. 21-690-MW/SCY, 2024 WL 3401048 (D. N. M. July 12, 2024)

Podurama

Home

Trending

Personal

Your Podcasts

New Episodes

My Files

Favourite Episodes

Tags (Folders)

Recently Played

Bookmarks

Followed Playlists

Episode 143 - Depo Case Digest for the week of July 29, 2024

10,000 Depositions Later Podcast

AI Chapters

AI Insights

Reviews