Photo of Bexis

Counsel defending depositions have a decision to make – whether, after opponent’s the direct examination of the witness is complete, whether to “cross-examine” a witness aligned with our own client.  Usually, the answer will be “no,” because such questioning usually offers no advantages and could well undermine the witness (who may lose focus under friendly

Photo of Bexis

As a follow-on to our post last year about remote (Zoom) depositions), we received a suggestion that we examine MDL orders to see how they have been handling remote deposition procedure during the COVID-19 pandemic.  That made sense to us because in MDLs every procedural jot and tittle is gone over with a fine-toothed comb. 

Photo of Bexis

With November representing the 18th month of socially distanced litigation, we thought we’d take a look at what courts have said about remote (usually Zoom) depositions.  Like it or not, we think they’re here to stay.

Yes/No

The first question is whether or not to have them.  Can one side impose them unilaterally?

The answer

Photo of Bexis

Here is another post by our blogger in training, Dean Balaes.  This time he explores an interesting decision that applied the “sham affidavit” doctrine to defeat an all-too-common P-side deposition tactic, last minute leading questions (often when the defense has no time for re-cross) designed to generate self-serving answers that contradict prior damaging testimony.

Photo of Stephen McConnell

Any lawyer practicing for more than five minutes has heard of the lawsuit called Jarndyce and Jarndyce. Charles Dickens constructed his great (in size and merit) novel Bleak House around the fictitious case, which drew together the fates of a large cast of characters. Jarndyce and Jarndyce concerned the interpretation of a will, occupied the

Photo of Stephen McConnell

Our ongoing tour of Famous Novels We Missed Along the Way has introduced us to some splendid prose. Thackeray and Trollope insert subtle judgments just beneath the surface of their narratives. They can teach us much about how to deliver an opening statement that is a powerful argument precisely because it does not sound like