
Sign up to save your podcasts
Or


In our never-ending mission to ensure you're never caught off guard, no matter what the tactic, today we address the question whether multiple lawyers on behalf of the same party object during a deposition. As always, we discuss the best strategies when using (or defending against) this tactic, and we provide cases on point in the show notes. Have a great week!
SHOW NOTES
Webster v. Target Corporation, Case No. 2:22-cv-11293-MAG-CI, 2023 WL 6509097 (E. D. Mich. Oct. 5, 2023) (holding that there is no prohibition against multiple lawyers for the same party objecting while defending a deponent, but limiting parties to a single attorney during future depositions in the case)
Continental Casualty Company v. Compass Bank, Case No. CV-04-0766-CB-C, 2005 WL 8158673 (S. D. Ala. Dec. 7, 2005) (finding there is no flat prohibition against the practice of having multiple lawyers objecting on behalf of the same party during a deposition)
Fed. R. Evid. 611(a) (authorizing the trial judge to control the mode of examination and presentation of evidence at trial)
Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(d)(3)(A) (allowing for an oral motion to terminate or limit a deposition in progress where it is being conducted in bad faith or in a manner intended to annoy, oppress, or embarrass a party or deponent)
Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c) (authorizing parties to seek protective orders limiting or otherwise prescribing the manner in which discovery may be conducted)
By Jim Garrity5
9898 ratings
In our never-ending mission to ensure you're never caught off guard, no matter what the tactic, today we address the question whether multiple lawyers on behalf of the same party object during a deposition. As always, we discuss the best strategies when using (or defending against) this tactic, and we provide cases on point in the show notes. Have a great week!
SHOW NOTES
Webster v. Target Corporation, Case No. 2:22-cv-11293-MAG-CI, 2023 WL 6509097 (E. D. Mich. Oct. 5, 2023) (holding that there is no prohibition against multiple lawyers for the same party objecting while defending a deponent, but limiting parties to a single attorney during future depositions in the case)
Continental Casualty Company v. Compass Bank, Case No. CV-04-0766-CB-C, 2005 WL 8158673 (S. D. Ala. Dec. 7, 2005) (finding there is no flat prohibition against the practice of having multiple lawyers objecting on behalf of the same party during a deposition)
Fed. R. Evid. 611(a) (authorizing the trial judge to control the mode of examination and presentation of evidence at trial)
Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(d)(3)(A) (allowing for an oral motion to terminate or limit a deposition in progress where it is being conducted in bad faith or in a manner intended to annoy, oppress, or embarrass a party or deponent)
Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c) (authorizing parties to seek protective orders limiting or otherwise prescribing the manner in which discovery may be conducted)

32,079 Listeners

30,670 Listeners

43,540 Listeners

16,383 Listeners

461 Listeners

26,383 Listeners

9,503 Listeners

56,402 Listeners

186 Listeners

5,742 Listeners

16,097 Listeners

48 Listeners

737 Listeners

10,815 Listeners

8,363 Listeners