19 Monday Mar 2018
Have you ever prepared witnesses or clients for a deposition or trial? If you have, then you know these rules or techniques are the classics. Tried and true. If you haven’t, here is some of the best advice you will ever get. This is a “must bookmark.” -CCE
22 Saturday Apr 2017
Posted in Depositions, Discovery, Trial Tips and Techniques, Witness Preparation, Witnesses
≈ Comments Off on Trial Witnesses And Depositions Transcripts.
Use Your Deposition as Your Sword and Shield, by Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm, Persuasive Litigator™
Depositions can be taken months, even years, before a case goes to trial. Even though you may routinely provide every deponent with a copy of the transcript of his or her deposition, does the witness or your client really understand how important it truly is to study it thoroughly? Sometimes I wonder whether they see it more as a bother. Including a copy of this post might help. -CCE
See also Overlearn Your Deposition, by Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm, Persuasive Litigator™ at http://www.persuasivelitigator.com/2017/02/overlearn-your-deposition.html.
17 Sunday Jan 2016
Posted in Depositions, Discovery, Trial Tips and Techniques, Witness Preparation, Witnesses
≈ Comments Off on Witness Preparation for Depositions. How to Say Enough But Not Too Much.
Witness, Don’t Teach” (in Deposition), by Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm, Persuasive Litigator™
One common piece of advice given to fact witnesses during deposition preparation meetings is that it isn’t their role to instruct opposing counsel on everything they ought to know: ‘Witness, Don’t Teach.’ . . .
Earlier this week, I was working with an anesthesiologist who simply could not deaden his impulse to take each question as an invitation to explain, expand, and expound. Applying our advice to ‘just answer the question and stop’ proved difficult once he got into the expository groove of his typical conversation style with colleagues, patients, and family members. That habit is one worth breaking, even if it takes some extra work and focus. . . . To aid in the continuing effort to convince witnesses to take off their teacher’s hats during the deposition, this post shares five reasons why that’s a good idea. . . .
16 Saturday Jan 2016
Posted in Attorney Discipline, Benchslap, Depositions, Discovery, Judges, Legal Ethics, Professional Civility, Rules of Professional Responsibility
≈ Comments Off on Gender Discrimination During Deposition Earns Judge’s Benchslap.
Lawyer Receives Stern Benchslap And Amazing Sanction For Sexist Deposition Comment, by Staci Zaretsky, Above The Law Blog
As we’ve thoroughly documented in these pages, women who practice law are often subjected to demeaning and degrading comments from their male colleagues, for no other reason than because they’re women. One federal judge had finally had enough of this type of disrespectful behavior, so he took a lawyer to task for making a sexist remark during a deposition. . . .
24 Wednesday Jun 2015
Posted in Depositions, Discovery, E-Discovery, Evidence, Intellectual Property, Preservation, Spoilation
≈ Comments Off on Spoiled Evidence On Both Sides – What Else Could Go Wrong?
Court Finds Wife Liable for Agent-Husband’s Intentional Deletions, Recommends Default Judgment, by K&L Gates in CASE SUMMARIES
Malibu Media, LLC v. Tashiro, No. 1:13-cv-00205-WTL-MJD, 2015 WL 2371597 (S.D. Ind. May 18, 2015)
In this copyright infringement case, the court found that Defendants ‘spoiled evidence, committed perjury, and failed to discharge their duties to conduct discovery reasonably and in good faith’ and recommended default judgment. Notably, in addition to more familiar issues surrounding the topic of spoliation, the court’s opinion addressed the question of whether spoliation occurs when information is still recoverable (yes) and the propriety of imputing an agent’s bad acts in discovery where, as in this case, Defendant Wife ‘left it to her agent—her husband—to respond to Plaintiff’s document requests.’ . . .
25 Monday May 2015
Posted in 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, Depositions, Discovery, Federal Rules of Discovery, Relevance, Requests for Production, Subpoena Duces Tecum
≈ Comments Off on Judge Uses The “Mommy Voice.”
Tags
Above the Law, Benchslap, David Lat, Depositions, Discovery, Discovery Abuse, Judge Richard Leon
Benchslap Of The Day: Just. Produce. The Documents!, by David Lat, Above The Law Blog
http://abovethelaw.com/2014/02/benchslap-of-the-day-just-produce-the-documents/
What’s the “Mommy Voice?” We have all been there, and may have used it ourselves. It’s when your parent – usually your mother — calls you using your first, middle, and last names in a no-nonsense voice. Usually, whatever happens next, it isn’t pretty. -CCE
Yes, benchslaps are great fun to read about, especially if you enjoy a little schadenfreude. But benchslaps are not fun to receive — and they’re not always justified.
Because of the prestige of judicial office, judges generally get the benefit of the doubt when dishing out benchslaps. But sometimes judges go too far. For example, some observers felt that Judge Richard Posner crossed the line when interrogating a Jones Day partner during a recent Seventh Circuit argument.
This brings us to today’s benchslap — directed at a lawyer for the federal government, no less. It’s harsh, but is it warranted? . . .
13 Monday Apr 2015
Posted in Clouds, Discovery, Dropbox, iPad, Legal Technology, Presentations, Tablets, Video Deposition
≈ Comments Off on Take Depositions To The Next Level With High Tech.
Tags
Brian Focht, Deposition Exhibits, Depositions, iPad, Live Stream Video, Tablets, The Cyber Advocate, Video Depositions
4 High Tech Ways to Improve Your Depositions, by Brian Focht, The Cyber Advocate Blog
http://www.thecyberadvocate.com/2015/04/08/4-high-tech-ways-improve-depositions/
Last week I had the (good?) fortune to attend two depositions spanning three days in a construction defect case. We represent a fairly peripheral sub-contractor, so despite exceeding 20 total hours, I didn’t get the opportunity to ask a single question. However, we’re not so peripheral that I could completely space out.
Over the course of three days, which included the introduction of about 100 exhibits (I’m impressed at the plaintiff’s counsel’s restraint, except when you consider that many exhibits exceeded 250 pages each), I listened intently. Or as intently as possible.
Until the other part of my brain, the part that writes this blog, kicked in. I analyzed what I thought was an intelligent, if complicated, system put in place that uses Dropbox for sharing exhibits. But that was really it. No video, no digital exhibits, remote participants listening by phone. I couldn’t help but think that there had to be a better way than this. . . .
19 Thursday Mar 2015
Posted in Attorney Fees and Costs, Depositions, Discovery, E-Discovery, Hard Drives, Taxation of Costs, Video Deposition
≈ Comments Off on Imaging A Hard Drive = Making A Copy And Within Plain Meaning Of Taxation Of Costs.
Tags
Bow Tie Law Blog, E-Discovery, Hard Drives, Josh Gilliland, Taxation of Costs, Video Depositions
Stating Reality: Imaging a Hard Drive Makes a Copy, by Josh Gilliland, Esq., Bow Tie Law
https://bowtielaw.wordpress.com/2015/03/19/stating-reality-imaging-a-hard-drive-makes-a-copy/
Taxation of cost cases do not generally have happy endings for recovering eDiscovery costs. The United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit issued a very important opinion on March 17, 2015 well grounded in the reality of civil litigation and the law where eDiscovery costs were recovered.
It also takes a swing at Race Tires, which is always a welcome read.
The Court of Appeals held that the cost of video deposition synchronization and transcript were properly taxed. Colosi v. Jones Lang LaSalle Ams., Inc., 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 4184, 2-3 (6th Cir. Ohio 2015). The Trial Court had determined the synchronized video deposition was ‘reasonably necessary’ and the opposing party never explained how the costs were either unreasonable or unnecessary. Id.
For anyone who has conducted deposition review, this is good news. I have spent many hours reviewing depositions and video depositions. ‘Reasonably necessary’ is an understatement. Synced video depos allow you to understand the context of the testimony. A simple question and answer in a transcript can look harmless, but if the video shows the deponent turning bright red, biting his lip, and answering the question with his teeth clinched, you know that testimony is important. . . .
16 Monday Feb 2015
Posted in Depositions, Discovery, Evidence, Transcripts, Trial Tips and Techniques, Witness Preparation, Witnesses
≈ Comments Off on At Depositions, Ask the Witness To Show, Not Tell.
Tags
Court Record, Depositions, Elliott Wilcox, Evidence, Transcripts, Trial Theater©, Trial Tips & Techniques
Impeach Witnesses by Creating an Effective Record at Depositions, by Elliott Wilcox, Trial Theater©
The depositions were taking longer than expected, and they were some of the most boring depos I’ve ever attended. As we approached 3 o’clock, I could barely keep my eyes open. Luckily, closing my eyes for a brief moment helped me see what the deposition transcript would look like, and pointed out the difference between talking to the witness and talking to the record. Take a look at two sample questions that were asked:
“This blood here, is that from this general area here, or is that from another area?”
“Is this photograph here a photograph of this area here?”
Huh? Do you have any idea what they’re talking about? Do you know where the blood is? Neither will they when the attorney if she tries to impeach the witness using this deposition during trial. . . .
20 Tuesday Jan 2015
Posted in Depositions, Discovery, Federal Rules of Discovery, Objections
≈ Comments Off on Deposition Advice for Witnesses.
Tags
Depositions, Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm, Leading Questions, Objections, Persuasive Litigator, Witness Preparation, Witnesses
Don’t Be Led (in Deposition), by Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm, Persuasive Litigator
The name ‘Discovery’ doesn’t quite do justice to the litigation phase it describes. When it’s done well and with purpose, the point of discovery isn’t so much to discover evidence as it is to create evidence. In deposition, for example, the deposing attorney’s fondest wish is not to discover the witness’s view of what happened, but instead to get that witness to confirm the attorney’s version of what the case requires. For that reason, taking a deposition is all about control. The deposing attorney would just testify on his own if he could, but the process doesn’t allow that, so the next best thing is to fully control the witness. And the best way to fully control the witness is to lead. . . .
21 Sunday Dec 2014
Posted in Attorney-Client Privilege, Cross-Examination, Defense Counsel, Depositions, Direct Examination, Discovery, Interrogatories, Litigation, Making Objections, Negligence, Personal Injury, Plaintiff's Counsel, Privilege and Confidentiality, Trial Tips and Techniques
≈ Comments Off on May Defense Counsel Ask Plaintiff Whether He Was Referred to Doctor?
“Did Your Attorney Refer You to that Doctor?” by Daniel E. Cummins, TORT TALK Blog
In a recent Delaware County Court of Common Pleas decision in the case of English v. Stepchin, No. CP-23-CV-786-2014, 101 Del. 424 (C.P. Del. Co. Nov. 12, 2014 Kenney, P.J.), President Judge Chad F. Kenney upheld a defense attorney’s right to inquire of a personal injury plaintiff whether or not plaintiff’s counsel had referred the plaintiff to her treating physician.
This issue came before the court on a Motion for a Re-Deposition of the plaintiff by defense counsel.
At the original deposition, plaintiff’s counsel objected to the defense counsel’s question to the plaintiff as to whether or not plaintiff’s counsel had referred the plaintiff to her treating physicans. Plaintiff’s counsel asserted that such discovery was barred by the attorney-client privilege.
In his Opinion issued on the matter, President Judge Kenney held that, ‘whether counsel referred Plaintiff to her treating physicians does not constitute legal assistance so as to justify properly invoking the attorney-client privilege.’ More specifically, the court found that whether an attorney referred his client to a medical provider for treatment cannot be considered to have been a communication from an attorney to his or her client associated with the rendering of a legal opinion or the provision of legal services so as to invoke the applicability of the attorney-client privilege.President Judge Kenney also stated that any asserted privilege ‘failed to outweigh the interest of the accessibility of material evidence to further the truth-determining process’ at a trial of a personal injury matter.
The Court granted Defendant’s Motion and ordered a 2nd deposition limited to the issue of who referred Plaintiff to her treating physicians.
Anyone wishing to review this decision, may click this LINK.
03 Wednesday Dec 2014
Posted in Depositions, Discovery
≈ Comments Off on Want To Take Better Depositions? Follow The Basics.
Six Steps to Better Depositions, by Evan Schaeffer, Lawyerist Blog
https://lawyerist.com/78538/six-steps-better-depositions/
Evan Shaeffer is one of my favorites. The art of taking a deposition is one of his specialities. -CCE
My first depositions were often frightening experiences. Like most new lawyers, I plunged ahead and tried to do my best, but I rarely felt at ease.
As my discomfort gave way to confidence, I developed techniques I began to use at every deposition. What follow are guidelines, not hard-and-fast rules. But I consider these techniques so useful I continue to use them today. . . .
22 Wednesday Oct 2014
Posted in Advertising, Depositions, Discovery, Law Office Management, Marketing, Objections, Video Deposition
≈ Comments Off on Witness Preparation = Successful Depositions.
Tags
Depositions, Discovery, Jim Calloway, Jim Calloway's Law Practice Tips Blog, Law Office Marketing, Oklahoma Bar Association, Robert P. Redemann
Witness Preparation: Best Practices for a Successful Deposition, by Jim Calloway, Jim Calloway’s Law Practice Tips Blog
Jim Calloway is a superhero masquerading as the Director of the Oklahoma Bar Association’s Management Assistance Program. While that being the Director of the OBA’s Management Assistant Program may be Jim’s “day job,” Jim does far more than that. This link will tell you more about his other activities, and I have no idea where he finds the time: http://jimcalloway.typepad.com/about.html.
But the best thing about Jim is that we found him first! And we know a good thing when we see it. We may share him with the rest of you from time to time, but luckily Jim has – so far – always called Oklahoma his home. -CCE
Witness Preparation: Best Practices for a Successful Deposition is a really nice article by Tulsa, Oklahoma attorney Robert P. Redemann. I strongly recommend it to any lawyer, even those who might not be involved with depositions. Sometimes it is good to understand best practices in our profession. Share the link with a young lawyer you know.
I would add one other item. Have you looked at the materials you routinely give the client to prepare for a deposition recently? Surely all law firms have progressed past the point of giving clients photocopied deposition tips in favor of custom-prepared materials with the law firm’s name, address and logo. But if you have not reviewed your handouts lately, take a look. A good proofing and freshening is often in order. Use some different sized fonts, headers, text boxes or insert a small graphic or two to increase readability. You never know who may be looking at this document sometime as a representation of your firm’s work product. Make this a professional document you are proud to have carry your firm’s name.
03 Sunday Aug 2014
Posted in Depositions, Discovery, Federal Rules of Discovery, Objections, Sanctions, U.S. District Court of the Northern District of Iowa
≈ Comments Off on Federal Judge Benchslaps Counsel For Discovery Abuse In A Very Special Way.
Tags
Above the Law (blog), Deposition Objections, Discovery Abuse, Discovery Sanctions, Joe Patrice, Judge Mark Bennett
Biglaw Firm Ordered To Make A Video Apologizing For Discovery Abuses, by Joe Patrice, Above The Law Blog
Litigators get away with a lot of obnoxious stuff during discovery. For better or worse, the pre-trial discovery phase of civil litigation is every lawyer’s opportunity to relive those times when parents leave kids alone for the first time: every slight, disagreement, and jealousy on a slow boil explodes into anarchic back-biting once there’s no authority figure around to enforce civility. Bring on the mean-spirited letters and smack-talking RFAs.
When it comes to depositions, it doesn’t always reach ‘fatboy’ levels, but a federal deposition isn’t a deposition until someone threatens to call the magistrate — though never does.
Which is why this benchslap, where a federal judge levies a sanction straight out of elementary school, is so appropriate….
17 Tuesday Jun 2014
Posted in Depositions, E-Discovery, Emails, Government, Internal Revenue Service, Legal Technology, Litigation Hold, Microsoft Office, Outlook, PC Computers, Preservation, Requests for Production
≈ Comments Off on IRS Says It Did Not Back Up Email, But Relied on Employees To Archive Email On Personal Computers.
Tags
Computer Backups, Computer Crash, Disaster Preparedness, Emails, Evidence, IRS, Lois Lerner, Outlook, POLITICOPro, Rachel Bade, Ways and Means
GOP: IRS Lost More Emails In Tea Party Affair, by Rachel Bade with contributions by Josh Gerstein and Brian Faler, POLITICOPro
This did not catch my eye because of the politics or that the involved party is the IRS. I was simply in awe that anyone in this day and age of litigation holds and e-discovery could – with a straight face – claim to have irretrievably lost so much computer data. -CCE
Republicans on Tuesday charged that the IRS has lost emails of a half dozen of its employees involved in the tea party targeting controversy, including a top aide to the now-fired acting IRS commissioner.
In addition to losing two years’ worth of emails sent and received by Lois Lerner, the central figure in the scandal, the IRS ‘cannot produce records from six other IRS employees involved in the targeting of conservative groups,’ Ways and Means Republicans said in a release.
* * *
Ways and Means does not say how the emails went missing or what time specific time periods are involved, though they say it includes the period at issue. In the case of Lerner, for example, her archived emails between 2009 and 2011 were washed away in a 2011 computer crash, the agency says.
* * *
The IRS says that at the time they did not keep records of or back up all emails. Rather, they relied on employees to archive them on their personal computers after they ran out of storage space in their Outlook inboxes. . . .
08 Sunday Jun 2014
Posted in Court Rules, Courts, Depositions, Discovery, E-Discovery, Federal District Court Rules, Federal Rules of Discovery, Interrogatories, Preservation, Requests for Admissions, Requests for Production
≈ Comments Off on Proposed Amendments to Federal Civil Procedure Rules Are Close to Approval.
Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure (“Standing Committee”) Approves Proposed Amendments to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, by K&L Gates, posted in FEDERAL RULES AMENDMENTS, NEWS & UPDATES.
The amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure will be finalized sometime in September. -CCE
Last week, the Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure (the “Standing Committee”) approved proposed amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, including the “Duke Rules Package,” addressing Rules 1, 4, 16, 26, 30, 31, 33, and 34 and a rewritten version of Rule 37(e), addressing preservation. The proposed amendments were approved with only two revisions to the proposed Committee Notes for Rules 26(b)(1) (encouraging consideration and use of technology) and 37(e) (clarifying the role of prejudice in subsection (e)(2) of the proposed rule). Meeting minutes reflecting the precise changes to the Committee Notes are not yet available, although the text of the rules as adopted was published in the Standing Committee’s meeting Agenda Book, available here.
The next stop for the proposed amendments is the Judicial Conference, which will consider the proposed amendments at its meeting in September.
01 Sunday Jun 2014
Posted in Cross-Examination, Depositions, Discovery, Expert Witness, Trial Tips and Techniques
≈ Comments Off on Preparing for Expert Witness Depositions.
Tags
Cross-Examination, Depositions, Evan Schaeffer, Expert Depositions, Expert Witnesses, The Trial Practice Tips Weblog
Preparing for Expert Depositions by Looking Ahead to the Cross-Examination at Trial, by Evan Schaeffer, The Trial Practice Tips Weblog
Your preparation for depositions will generally be much easier if you think about the ways the testimony will be used at trial. This tip applies to most pretrial discovery: it’s almost never an end in itself, but something that will be used later in front of a jury. It’s no accident that the ins-and-outs of pretrial discovery often make more sense after a lawyer has witnessed some actual trials. When trials are scarce, even reading trial transcripts helps.
The looking-ahead-to-trial tip can be especially useful for deposing your opponent’s experts. If you often rely on outlines prepared by other lawyers, this method will also help you understand why it’s important to ask the questions lawyers typically ask when deposing experts. . . .
28 Wednesday May 2014
Posted in Depositions, Discovery, Litigation
≈ Comments Off on Lowering the Bar Calls for Deposition Transcripts.
Call for Transcripts, by Kevin Underhill, Lowering the Bar Blog
http://www.loweringthebar.net/2014/05/call-for-transcripts.html
I doubt your clients would approve of sharing a deposition transcript from their case with Kevin, regardless of how hilarious it might be. Don’t worry. Kevin already has quite a collection. -CCE
Last month the New York Times did a fantastic video reenactment of some truly ridiculous deposition testimony. See ‘What Is a Photocopier? (Deposition, Dramatized),’ Lowering the Bar (Apr. 28, 2014) (direct link here). They are looking for more of that kind of thing, which I think is great news, and they asked me for help, which I also think is great. The posts linked below are the ones I recommended as mentioning possible candidates for reenactment, although I unfortunately don’t actually have all of the transcripts. . . .
24 Saturday May 2014
Posted in Depositions, Discovery, Objections
≈ Comments Off on Deposition Objections – What’s Proper and What’s Not.
Tags
Compound Questions, Deposition Objections, Hearsay, Lawyerist Blog, Privilege and Confidentiality, Relevancy, Speculation, Susan Minsberg
Proper Deposition Objections, by Susan Minsberg, Lawyerist Blog
http://lawyerist.com/16801/proper-deposition-objections/
Whether you are defending (or taking) your first or your hundredth deposition, you must be ready to handle objections. That means knowing which objections are proper and which are not. Once you know, you can keep the deposition proceeding smoothly — and avoid embarrassing yourself. . . .
24 Saturday May 2014
Posted in Admissibility, Authentication, Depositions, Discovery, Evidence, Federal Rules of Discovery, Federal Rules of Evidence, Interrogatories, Relevance, Requests for Admissions, Requests for Production, Sanctions, Subpoena Duces Tecum, Trial Tips and Techniques
≈ Comments Off on When Discovery Becomes Less About The Merits of the Case And More About Obstruction.
Tags
Boilerplate Objections, Discovery, Litigation and Trial Blog, Matthew Jarvey, Max Kennerly, Meet and Confer, Motion to Compel, Requests for Admission
Boilerplate Objections And “Good Faith” Requirements Are Ruining Civil Discovery, by Max Kennerly, Esq., Litigation and Trial Blog
Please make sure to catch the reference and link to: Matthew Jarvey, “Boilerplate Discovery Objections,” 61 Drake L. Rev. 913 (2013). -CCE
‘If there is a hell to which disputatious, uncivil, vituperative lawyers go, let it be one in which the damned are eternally locked in discovery disputes with other lawyers of equally repugnant attributes.’ Dahl v. City of Huntington Beach, 84 F.3d 363, 364 (9th Cir. 1996) (quoting Krueger v. Pelican Prod. Corp., No. CIV-87-2385-A (W.D. Okla. Feb. 24, 1989). . . .
18 Sunday May 2014
Posted in Attorney-Client Privilege, Depositions, Discovery, Evidence, Objections
≈ Comments Off on Deposition Objections – How To Make And Defend Them.
Proper Deposition Objections, by Susan Minsberg, Lawyerist Blog (with hat tip to Evan Schaeffer!)
http://lawyerist.com/16801/proper-deposition-objections/
Whether you are defending (or taking) your first or your hundredth deposition, you must be ready to handle objections. That means knowing which objections are proper and which are not. Once you know, you can keep the deposition proceeding smoothly — and avoid embarrassing yourself. . . .
03 Monday Mar 2014
Posted in Affidavits, Cross-Examination, Depositions, Direct Examination, Discovery, E-Discovery, Evidence, Exhibits, Expert Witness Report, Expert Witnesses, Experts, Forensic Expert Witness, Hearsay, Legal Technology, Legal Writing, Trial Tips and Techniques
≈ Comments Off on Craig Ball On Being A Digital Forensic Witness.
Tags
Affidavits, Ball In Your Court Blog, Craig Ball, Depositions, E-Discovery, Evidence, Expert Witness Report, Forensic Expert Witness, Trial Tips & Techniques
Becoming a Better Digital Forensics Witness, by Craig Ball, Ball In Your Court Blog
I love to testify—in court, at deposition, in declarations and affidavits—and I even like writing reports about my findings in forensic exams.
I love the challenge—the chance to mix it up with skilled interrogators, defend my opinions and help the decision makers hear what the electronic evidence tells us. There is a compelling human drama being played out in those bits and bytes, and computer forensic examiners are the fortunate few who get to tell the story. It’s our privilege to help the finders of fact understand the digital evidence.[1]
This post is written for computer forensic examiners and outlines ways to become a more effective witness and common pitfalls you can avoid. But the advice offered applies as well to almost anyone who takes the stand. . . .
. . .
02 Sunday Mar 2014
Posted in Court Rules, Depositions, Discovery, Employment Law, Federal District Court Rules, Federal Rules of Discovery, Video Deposition
≈ Comments Off on Skype For Video Depositions?
Tags
Bow Tie Law’s Blog, Deposition, Discovery Dispute, Federal Rule 26(g), Federal Rules of Discovery, Hernandez v. Hendrix Produce, Joshua Gilliland, Judge G.R. Smith, Meet and Confer, Skype, Video Deposition
“Stop and Think” About Skype for Depositions, by Joshua Gilliland, Bow Tie Law’s Blog
http://bowtielaw.wordpress.com/2014/02/03/another-skyping-judge/
Judge G.R. Smith issued a great reminder that lawyers must ‘stop and think’ when dealing with discovery disputes. This duty is imposed by Rule 26(g) and is ‘an affirmative duty to engage in pretrial discovery in a responsible manner that is consistent with the spirit and purposes of Rules 26 through Rule 37, and obligates each attorney to stop and think about the legitimacy of a discovery request, a response thereto, or an objection.’ Hernandez v. Hendrix Produce, Inc., 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4837 (S.D. Ga. Jan. 9, 2014) citing Bottoms v. Liberty Life Assur. Co. of Boston, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 143251, 2011 WL 6181423 at * 4 (D. Colo. Dec. 13, 2011).
The case at issue requiring lawyers to ‘stop and think’ involved the plaintiffs in a farmworker rights lawsuit. Three of the plaintiffs were in Mexico and unable to return to Georgia for their depositions. The Defendants wanted the depositions to be held in Georgia. . . .
22 Saturday Feb 2014
Posted in Cross-Examination, Damages, Exhibits, Experts, Litigation, Motor Vehicle, Personal Injury, Plaintiff's Counsel, Product Liability, Trial Tips and Techniques, Video Deposition, Witnesses
≈ Comments Off on More On Why Lawsuits Are So Expensive.
Tags
Accident Reconstructionist, Cross-Examination, Daubert Rule, Engineer, Expert Witness, Filing Fees, Personal Injury, Product Liability, Video Deposition
Why Lawsuits Are So Expensive, Pt. II, by Gregory H. Haubrich, Foshee & Yafee, Butter’s Blog
http://greghaubrich.com/2014/02/13/why-lawsuits-are-so-expensive-pt-ii/
In my previous edition of Butter’s Blog, Part I explored why lawsuits are so expensive. In Part II, we are going to break down the costs of getting your case to trial. To get a rough estimate of what your law firm may spend handling the case, we must first look at what kind of case it is.
03 Monday Feb 2014
Posted in Depositions, Discovery, Expert Witness, Experts, Health Law, Law Office Management, Litigation, Medical Malpractice, Personal Injury, Trial Tips and Techniques
≈ Comments Off on Experienced Trial Attorney Shares The Risks and Rewards Of Personal Injury Lawsuits.
Tags
Butter’s Blog, Expert Witness Fees, Fortune 500, Foshee & Yaffe, Gregory H. Haubrich, Jackpot Justice, Lawyer Fees, Litigation Costs, Medical Malpractice, Personal injury lawyer, Trial Tips & Techniques
Why Lawsuits Are So Expensive, Pt. I, by Gregory H. Haubrich, Foshee & Yaffe, Butter’s Blog
You’d be surprised at how careful good personal injury lawyers are about what cases they take. In general the public thinks that we can take any person with any complaint and get them some of what our governor calls “jackpot justice.” In truth, the economics of our practice and the ethics of our profession require that we only take cases of serious injury that are objectively provable. We as plaintiff’s lawyers most often fund the expenses of our clients’ cases; otherwise they would not have access to the courts because court cases are expensive. However, if we invest in unsuccessful cases, the time and money we put into those cases will be lost.
