Whose Depositions Should You Attend?

As a plaintiff, you know that you will be required to submit to a deposition by opposing counsel. If you are married, it is likely that you plan to attend your spouse’s deposition as well, as that is often scheduled for the same day as your own. Beyond that, you probably don’t plan to attend any other depositions in your case. Most lawyers will not encourage you to attend other people’s depositions — but maybe they should. As a named party in the lawsuit, you have the right to attend any and all depositions in your case. The rules of sequestration of witnesses (keeping witnesses from sitting in on each others’ testimony to avoid collusion) do not apply to you. So, why would you want to attend anyone else’s deposition, and whose depositions should you attend?

Why Attend Another Witness’ Deposition?

Depositions can be boring, time consuming affairs even for the parties actively involved (the lawyers and witnesses), and this will certainly be the case for a passive observer such as yourself. You may have to miss time from work to attend them, as they are scheduled almost exclusively during business hours, and your lawyer may not even want you there (who needs the extra pressure?). You won’t be able to speak during the deposition, and at best you can aid your lawyer by slipping him an occasional note. So why subject yourself to that?

I would argue that you should attend every deposition where your mere presence may positively influence the testimony in your favor. There is a scene from The Godfather: Part II in which Frank Pentangeli (a member of the Corleone crime family) is testifying before Congress and is about to expose the Corleone family’s mafia secrets. Suddenly, an elderly Italian man (dressed in “old country” attire) enters the hearing room. Frank looks back at the man, who doesn’t say a word — he just takes a seat in the gallery. From that point forward, Frank denies the existence of the mafia and refuses to give the hearing committee any useful information. It is later revealed that this man is Frank’s cousin from Sicily. Some interpret this scene as a direct threat by the Corleone family against Frank’s cousin (testify and we’ll kill him). I always saw it as a more subtle attempt to coerce Frank into not betraying “the family” by appealing to his sense of shame. If he were to become a “rat”, he would have to do it in front of one of his family members from the old country. Under this pressure to preserve his family’s honor, Frank cannot betray his oath to the Corleone family.

Ask a Lawyer Online.  Get an Answer ASAP.

Obviously, I’m not saying that you should intimidate witnesses in any fashion. I use this example merely to illustrate that witnesses can be influenced by the mere presence of other people. In your case, you want the witnesses to tell the truth, or at the very least, hold true to what they have previously represented to you. It is much harder to throw someone under the bus when that person is sitting directly across from you. So which witnesses might be influenced by your presence?

Why You May Want to Attend the Defendant’s Deposition

If you were injured by the clear actions of a single individual, such as another driver in a car accident, you may want to attend his deposition. Unless the defendant is a sociopath, it will be much harder for him to testify falsely about how the accident occurred while you are staring at him from across the table. He’s also much less likely to speculate about facts or conversations which took place at the time of the accident, knowing that there’s someone in the room who will know when he gets something wrong. Even though you can’t jump up out of your seat and yell “liar!” every time he bends the truth, the thought of that happening will be in the back of his mind. This subtle pressure may mean the difference between an outright admission of fault and a hedged answer that leaves open the possibility that you were at fault as well.

If your defendant is a property owner or business, such as in a slip and fall case, your presence may not have much of an effect unless the person being deposed actually saw your accident and you expect him to contradict your account of what happened. The best pressure is applied when the witness knows that you know what really happened. If you don’t know how a liquid got onto the business’ floor (and if you slipped on it, I’d guess you didn’t see how it got there), a defendant won’t have a hard time speculating that it occurred in such a way that it minimizes his chance of liability.

If you attend a defendant’s deposition, be polite and unobtrusive. You job is not to piss the person off to the point that they become tight-lipped. This might hurt your lawyer’s chances of getting him to slip up. You must rely solely on your presence to apply the needed pressure.

Should I Attend Doctors’ Depositions?

Most of the time, your presence will not influence the testimony of your treating physicians. However, if you’ve noticed a pattern of your doctor being very supportive of your case while he’s treating you, and not so supportive in his written records (ask your lawyer), you may want to attend his deposition. Some doctors will patronize plaintiffs and say whatever they feel they need to in order to avoid confrontation over the lawsuit, all the while creating written records which undermine your case.

If you find yourself in this position, your presence at his deposition may force him to testify more consistently with what he said to you during your appointments. Otherwise, he knows he’s going to get an earful at your next appointment. This will also allow your lawyer to more effectively ask questions such as “Didn’t you tell the plaintiff . . .(e.g., that his injury would prevent him from returning to his job?)” and make your doctor answer right in front of you. Again, it’s harder for your doctor to say “the plaintiff must have misheard me” or “I never said that” when he knows that someone else in the room (you) knows exactly what he said.

You shouldn’t bother attending the depositions of non-treating doctors, such as the defendant’s expert witnesses (or even your own, if they’ve never treated you), as your presence is unlikely to have any impact on their testimony.

What About Other Witnesses?

With other witnesses, you’ll have to play it by ear. If your employer is being deposed, ask yourself if he’s less likely to be critical of you in your presence. For family and friends, consider the likelihood of them downplaying your injuries or exposing embarrassing secrets while you sit within earshot. If you have any doubts, you should probably try to attend their depositions.

Ask a Lawyer Online.  Get an Answer ASAP.

What if My Own Lawyer Thinks I Shouldn’t Attend Other Depositions?

I am not going to tell you to go against your own lawyer’s advice. He knows your case better than I do. However, it wouldn’t hurt to ask his reasons for not wanting you to attend other depositions. If they sound like good reasons, don’t argue with him. If they don’t sound like good reasons, try to pin him down on why he thinks it’s a “bad idea” for you to go. Don’t just settle for “I don’t think it would help.” Unless it would hurt your case, what do you have to lose, aside from your own time?

An additional benefit of attending other depositions is that you know your lawyer will be thoroughly prepared, and won’t just “wing it” (yes, we do that from time to time). No lawyer wants to look unprepared in front of his own client.

This entry was posted in Discovery and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

67 Responses to Whose Depositions Should You Attend?

  1. Gloria Whiting says:

    Plaintiff, I did a deposition on one defendant. Another defendant wouldn’t leave the room and disrupted the deposition. How do I Let the judge know? Is there something I can file with the court?

    • fl_litig8r says:

      As a party, the defendant has the same right to attend depositions as you. However, this does not include the right to be disruptive. After the deposition is over, there is little that can be done to fix any damage done. The best practice when a party is being disruptive is to pause the deposition and try to get the judge on the phone for an emergency hearing for a protective order. The protective order could explicitly state that the defendant is to remain silent and refrain from communicating with witnesses or being disruptive during the taking of testimony. If the conduct warrants it, the protective order could exclude the defendant from the deposition room.

      If you can’t get the judge on the phone, you could suspend the deposition until such time as your motion can be heard, and you can ask as part of your motion for the defendant to pay the costs and attorney’s fees for the second (continuation) deposition of the witness whose testimony he interrupted. This is a pretty severe response, so you should be sure that the defendant’s disruptive behavior is reflected in the deposition transcript. If the defendant is being disruptive in a non-verbal way, you’ll have to create the record of his disruptive behavior yourself, by saying on the record what the defendant is doing (e.g., “Let the record reflect that the defendant is [fill in the behavior]”) and asking that he stop or you will be forced to suspend the deposition to seek a protective order.

      If you anticipate that this defendant will disrupt future depositions, file a motion for a protective order before your next deposition and ask that the defendant either be excluded from the deposition due to his conduct at the prior deposition, or that he be ordered to be silent and non-disruptive. If he is disruptive again after this order, the judge could sanction him (usually requiring attorney fees to be paid for the time wasted, but it could be more severe depending on the egregiousness of the conduct — trying to feed a witness answers would warrant more sever sanctions, such as the striking of defenses or maybe even his entire answer).

      It is always best not to engage a person who is trying to disrupt your deposition, if possible. You’re just giving him what he wants. Ignore him and focus on the witness. Don’t let him bait you (or your lawyer) into an argument that disrupts your train of thought. Usually, the threat of immediately calling the judge will stop bad behavior. If not, follow through with the threat. In fact, it may be a good idea to let the judge’s judicial assistant (“JA”) know before your next deposition that such a phone call may be required so that the judge is made aware of the problem and can try to be available to resolve it next time.

      In any event, a phone call (during the deposition) or a motion for protective order, even if denied, will let the judge know about the defendant’s bad conduct. The judge will keep the defendant on a short leash after that.

  2. Thomas says:

    Question on depositions – My wife and I are the plaintiffs in a personal injury situation. It was a car accident where my wife sustained the only injuries requiring medical attention. I was driving, however. The defendent got a ticket and fault isn’t a question in the case. My wife is being deposed this week. When fault isn’t in question, what kind of questions should she expect? Are they just trying to verify the extent of her injuries? I’ve not been asked to be deposed as of yet. We do have a lawyer who is meeting with my wife the day before the deposition. He says it’s my choice as to whether I want to be at the deposition or not. Any reason why you think I should or should not be there? Thanks!

    • fl_litig8r says:

      As far as the types of questions your wife can expect, I imagine that the primary focus will be on her medical care and how her injuries from this accident have affected her. However, even though liability is not at issue, she may still be asked questions about how the accident happened, as they may be relevant to the relatedness and severity of her injuries. As a lawyer, I’d want to know how hard the impact was, how her body was tossed around inside the car, and whether she was wearing her seatbelt, to name just a few things.

      If she has any pre-existing conditions, especially any medical treatment for the body parts affected in this accident, expect them to be thoroughly explored. “Causation” can still be at issue in an admitted liability case, so if they have any reason to suspect that some of her injuries were not caused by this accident they will question her about this.

      If your wife is making a wage loss claim, they will ask about how much time she has lost from work, when or if she is expected to return, and what kinds of limitations she has now that would prevent her from earning as much as before the accident.

      They will ask questions regarding her “loss of enjoyment of life” (a type of mental anguish), such as “What activities can’t you do now that you used to do before the accident?” Things like dancing, swimming, lifting heavy grocery bags, and playing with children are typical answers to this question. The question can also be re-phrased during your wife’s answer to say that there are lots of things that she can still do now, but which cause her pain due to her injuries. I’m sure your wife’s lawyer will prep her for these types of questions during his pre-depo conference with her.

      As far as you attending her deposition, unless they are deposing you the same day (or within 2-3 weeks of her depo), it isn’t absolutely necessary. Her deposition should be transcribed by then, so you can just read it. You could attend for moral support, if it’s not too inconvenient. You could ask her attorney’s office if he thinks the defendant will depose you. If he thinks they will, you’re probably better off going to her deposition, just so you don’t contradict her during your deposition (there’s always a possibility that the defendant won’t order her transcript before your depo).

  3. kim says:

    I will be attending all depositions in an employment law case. I’ve done a lot of work with my lawyer in preparing this case(RFPs, depo questions, admissions, etc) , and am practically sitting “second chair.” Other than handing him exhibits and slipping him notes, what is my role? Who should I be watching, the defendant, or his attorney, to see what sort of reaction the questions elicit from them?

    • fl_litig8r says:

      Primarily, your role will just be “observer.” Remember not to say anything during the depo (talk to your lawyer only during breaks and just use notes during questioning). Keep your poker face on. You don’t want the other side reading anything from you.

      If you’re looking for reactions, pay attention to the witness. The defense lawyer probably won’t give very much away (at least unintentionally) through body language. Also, if it’s clear that you are paying attention to the witness, it will add more pressure on him/her to tell the truth. This isn’t to say that the witness won’t lie anyway, but it should make it harder.

      Keep in mind that your lawyer may not go as deep in his questioning as you might expect. It may seem that he is not nailing down some vague answers. He may leave certain questions unasked — even ones you suggest. There are strategic reasons for not asking certain questions at deposition. Sometimes, you don’t want to give the defendant the opportunity to fix a prior bad answer by probing further (particularly when thinking about defending an almost inevitable summary judgment motion).

      I’ve handled enough employment discrimination cases in my day to know that they are rarely easy. The law is heavily skewed in favor of employers, and they don’t usually leave smoking guns laying around any more. It’s great that you found a lawyer to take your case. I wish you both luck.

      • kim says:

        Thanks for the encouragement! It’s primarily a retaliation case, with lots of documentary evidence, believe it or not. I got most of it by hitting them with Public Info Act requests while still employed (municipality), which they did not take to kindly to. Finding a lawyer was not easy, but he’s a great guy and keeps me informed much more than one normally would keep a client. This is a neat website, thanks!

        • fl_litig8r says:

          You’re welcome. You’re especially lucky to find a lawyer in an employment case against a government agency. There’s often more procedural hoops to jump through (there are in Florida, at least) and even fewer lawyers that want to take such a case.

          Public records laws are a beautiful thing. I used to use them often, especially in civil rights cases. Good for you in being proactive.

          If you like any particular articles on the site, a Facebook “like” or Google +1 helps its visibility in search engines. I have buttons at the bottom of each article. I hate asking for these, but I found that when I never asked, I got none. At least they’re free :).

  4. kim says:

    One more question, if you don’t mind. What do you think of the idea of me asking the questions during the depo? My attorney offered, and he won’t let me ask just a few questions, it is all or none. At first I said no, but, of the 5 we are going to do, there is one I feel it would totally rattle the witness. A little more on my background: I’m a retired cop, this witness is the Internal Affairs Lt. who would be totally offended by being questioned by a lowly patrol officer, especially a female one. (no, I’m not the “Average” plaintiff, not by a long shot!). My only concern would be in catching the responses that need follow up for nailing down, but he would be there to keep me straight. He would not have offered if he was not confident in my ability. Thank you.

    • fl_litig8r says:

      I don’t know if I’d ever feel comfortable letting a client ask her own deposition questions, even if that client was another lawyer. I definitely wouldn’t consider it if it involved a key witness. Unless it was a witness who needed to be questioned about a highly technical matter, where it would just be impractical to educate me enough to conduct a thorough deposition, I can’t envision a case where I’d let a lay person do the questioning.

      You may be capable of taking a great deposition, but I really wouldn’t suggest testing that theory. I’d much rather see you feed your lawyer questions and facts as necessary, in case he missed anything, than see him try to correct any defects in your deposition-taking technique on the fly.

      Think of when you first learned to drive: you had to pay so much attention to everything that you did. Now those things come naturally, so you can focus on making sure other drivers aren’t screwing up around you. It’s similar with deposition taking. The first few times you do it, you’re so nervous and paying such close attention to what you’re doing, that you don’t listen as closely as you should to the witness to prepare your follow-up questions. A lot of newbies actually write down the witness’ answers (even though there’s a court reporter right there), which really detracts from your active listening. Being able to jump from subject to subject without losing track of your intended lines of questioning is a skill that takes time and practice to develop.

      If you intend to go into the deposition with a list of questions to ask, you’re probably heading for trouble. These days, I hardly ever have a hard list of questions. I generally have an outline of subjects I want to cover, and maybe a handful of key questions that relate to exhibits I want to use, but most of the time I make it up as I go. People get so married to their question lists that they have a hard time deviating from them to ask follow-ups and then returning to where they left off. Some skip follow-ups just because they don’t want to get lost.

      I don’t mean to undermine your self-confidence, but “deposition taking” is one skill that really improves with practice and experience. If you want to give it a shot, I’d start with a brief deposition of someone unimportant, and see how you do, before you try it with a key witness.

  5. kim says:

    Thanks. That wasn’t what I wanted to hear, but I needed someone to bring me back down to reality! I know you are right.

  6. kim says:

    I got all that out of the first response, but thanks! Yeah, I’d be married to the list. My attorney works off an outline. He is handling a companion case and I’m impressed with the depos he did there. He had the details down really well. And bottom line, he is getting PAID to do this! It definitely was an ego booster to be asked, but like you said, it’s too important to blow. The fantasy is still good though!

  7. kim says:

    An intense 2 days. Glad I took your advice and stayed 2nd chair, where I saw more than enough action. Who would have thought that so many cops would develop such a bad case of amnesia. Long ways to go. Thx!

    • fl_litig8r says:

      LEOs are not the easiest people to depose (I’ve done a fair number of civil rights cases, so I know). Many are practically professional witnesses due to testifying in criminal cases. I’m glad you don’t regret letting your lawyer handle these depos. An insignificant lay witness is far better to cut your teeth on, should you ever again get the urge to try taking a depo down the road.

      I hope their depos went well for you, despite the rash of head injuries your former colleagues seem to have suffered.

      BTW, I took your last name off the comment — one never knows who may be Googling you some day.

  8. kim says:

    thx. it’s possibly too late, as the facebook “like” possibly got me caught. But I really have not said anything here that they don’t already know. They can tell that I am actively involved in the case, esp. after watching me locate and slip documents to my lawyer that we had not previously discussed, taking less than one minute to find them in a box of 3500 docs…

    • fl_litig8r says:

      I think you’re “like” is safe, as long as your Facebook privacy settings are set up well, which yours appear to be (I checked and couldn’t see anything except a profile pic, which I can safely assume isn’t you). Of course, if someone subpoena’s your Facebook info, your comments on this site would probably be the least of your concerns (I doubt if most lawyers would bother following up on someone’s Facebook “likes” anyway, given how random and uninformative they tend to be). I’m more concerned about someone just Googling a commenter’s name and automatically jumping here.

      In your specific case, given that everything we discussed has already taken place, I know it really wouldn’t matter now if the other side found this. I just think as a policy it’s always better to remain somewhat anonymous in your dealings on the internet. Of course, we lawyers tend to be paranoid that way.

  9. acm007 says:

    Can someone that is under medication and care of a Psychiatrist be able tonot to do a deposition? This case is related to a modification of a parental share plan and this person is the mother of 1 of the partys (grandmother of the kids involved).

    • fl_litig8r says:

      A judge would need to decide this issue, but in most cases it is unlikely that the person would be able to avoid giving a deposition. Unless her condition is so severe as to render her incompetent to testify or that she would suffer irreparable harm from testifying, she’s going to have to go through with it.

      Her child’s lawyer could file a motion for protective order to try to prevent or limit the deposition, based on the representations of her treating psychiatrist (he’d at least need to provide an affidavit, and may need to be deposed himself). The court could place a time limit on the deposition, order that it be conducted in a place where she feels comfortable (like her home) and may even order that her psychiatrist be present. It is highly unlikely that the court would say that she cannot be deposed at all. I’ve had clients with bi-polar disorder and severe PTSD who have given depositions without any issues, so the mere fact that she’s receiving mental health care won’t carry much weight. Her treating doctor must express some legitimate concerns about the effect of a deposition on her before the court will think of limiting or preventing it.

  10. Peggy Chudkosky says:

    Can you please answer this question. I live in NY have a slip and fall case. Had our depostions end of June- I am supposed to have an IME but defendents have not ordered one yet-Is there a specific time frame for this and if so and they fail to order the exam do they waive their right to request one to be done?

    • fl_litig8r says:

      In most state courts, no fixed deadline for discovery to be completed is set until you have a trial date. If the court has not issued an order in your case setting a discovery deadline, the defendant can request an IME at any time. If you don’t have a trial date, it’s unlikely that the court has set a discovery deadline yet — you’d have to check with your lawyer to be sure.

      • Peggy says:

        I have a conference date in March 2013 at the court house- I don’t understand a lot of this but I thank you very much for your answer.

        • fl_litig8r says:

          To try to simplify it: just ask your lawyer if the court has set a discovery deadline in your case. If it has, that’s the last day an IME can be done. If it hasn’t, an IME can be done at any time until a discovery deadline is set.

  11. LD says:

    Hi I am a plaintiff in my grandparents family trust suit. There are key witnesses being depositioned for my case and I was wondering if it is important for me to be there. I know the witnesses are there to help shed light to the case and from what I understand help my case and I feel me being there will be positive. I also know the defendant will be there and I fear there presence has the potential to be intimidating to my witness/witnesses. My lawyer has told me it doesnt matter either way and doesnt feel like I need to attend, however I feel like if I was there it could help them in being more open and honest. Any thoughts?

    • fl_litig8r says:

      If you think that your presence could counteract any pressure from the defendant being there, I think you should attend. Lawyers are never eager to having their clients breathing down their necks while they work (who wants the boss looking over your shoulder?), but as long as you act only as an observer, it shouldn’t bother him.

      Any time you think your presence may influence the deposition testimony in your favor, or prevent the other side from influencing the testimony against you, I think you should attend. It may not make any difference, but why risk it?

      • LD says:

        I never looked at it the way you described it and fully understand. Thank you for allowing me to maybe see his point of view. I will not be risking it and have decided to attend.

        Thanks again

  12. ballerina911 says:

    Hi! I happened upon your website and found it to be, by far, the most intriguing of my searches regarding attendance and depositions.

    I am the plaintiff suing X for civil damages after X plead down a sexual assault charge to criminal restraint/severe bodily injury and got 3 years in the state pen. He is now a convicted felon, this was his first trouble with the law.

    He is to be deposed within the next 2 weeks.

    Although difficult emotionally, my gut says MY appearance can help (fingers crossed). I suffer with all of the symptoms of his assault and the vandalism he ‘allegedly’ did to my home and property for 4 months following. (in hopes I would drop the charges)

    please use whatever you have to keep my ID private – however – if you can give me any insight, I would be very appreciative.

    Thank You

    • fl_litig8r says:

      If you feel that you can handle being in the same room with him while he is questioned about what he did to you, and that your presence will make it less likely for him to lie about what happened, this could help your case. Of course, if you’re receiving any counseling for this I would discuss this option with the counselor first — I’m no psychologist, so I don’t want to tell you to do something that is going to traumatize you further. If you don’t have a counselor, discuss it with a close friend or family member. If the counselor gives the “o.k.”, let your lawyer know you want to attend. If he has concerns, listen to them with an open mind. I’ve deposed people in prisons and jails before — if the defendant is still in prison, know that they can be pretty scary places even when you’re being escorted around by a corrections officer. Also, in a prison it may not be as easy to quickly leave the room if it becomes too upsetting.

      I think it’s brave of you to want to be there, but don’t put your lawsuit ahead of your emotional well-being. I’m sure your lawyer can do fine without you there. But, if you really want to be there for personal reasons, and you get the o.k. from your counselor or confidant, your presence could put pressure on the defendant to tell the truth (or at least not lie as much). I wish you luck.

  13. Michael says:

    My wife and I are being deposed by her ex in a custody battle in Illinois. Can I attend her session before I am deposed? Does the fact that she has epilepsy and had regular seizure have any effect what role I can play at her deposition or in court?

    • fl_litig8r says:

      Because you aren’t a party, you have no right to be present during her deposition. Her epilepsy won’t have any effect on that. You could just as easily wait outside the deposition room and be called in if anything happens.

      That being said, her lawyer could ask the other side to let you be present. If the other side has concerns about you hearing her testimony before your deposition (the fear is that you will tailor your answers around hers), you could offer to be deposed first without her present. This way, there would really be no harm in letting you hear her testimony, because yours is already locked in — and if she isn’t present for your deposition, she can’t tailor her testimony around yours.

  14. Laurie says:

    i just found out im being deposed monday…MONDAY for custody of my son. so is my ex. so we are both together stuck all day in a room. this man hurt me so badly i can’t speak when im in the same room with him. And i have no time to prepare. My own lawyer did this. I thought i had two more weeks.

    • fl_litig8r says:

      Lawyers tend to set depositions at the soonest opportunity that everyone and their attorneys are available. Most people want to get to them over with as soon as possible, if they are unavoidable. I’m sure he didn’t expect you to be upset with him scheduling it sooner than expected. On the bright side, it will be over on Monday night and you won’t have it hanging over your head for another two weeks.

      As far as preparation, you really don’t need to study for a deposition, and I’m not so sure that having extra days to worry about it will make you more mentally prepared. If your lawyer has met with you (or will before your depo) to go over deposition basics (I cover them here, even though the article is geared more towards a personal injury case), you’re as prepared as you need to be.

      Unless your ex-husband is subject to a restraining order that keeps him from attending the deposition, there’s nothing you can do to keep him out of the room while you’re being deposed. He won’t be able to question you himself, and he really shouldn’t speak to you at all during the process (aside from initial “hellos”). If he does anything to interfere while you’re being deposed, your lawyer can handle that. I’m sure your ex-husband’s lawyer has already told him what he can’t do during your depo, so it shouldn’t be a problem.

      If you don’t want to stay for your ex-husband’s deposition, you don’t have to. While strategically it would probably be helpful to have you there, there’s no rule requiring you to stay.

      Do your best to overcome your anxiety about speaking with your ex-husband in the room. You don’t want to give his lawyer any grounds to question your mental stability. I don’t know your situation, so don’t take this advice as making light of it. I just don’t want you to think that refusing to speak with him in the room will somehow result in him being kicked out. It’s more likely to reflect poorly on you, so do your best to push through it.

  15. Trish says:

    My husband’s ex-wife’s fiancé’ is being deposed in a countersuit to prove cohabitation to terminate alimony. My husband WILL BE THERE, will the ex-wife be allowed to attend? Should I also attend? Also, should I attend the on the Court date?

    • fl_litig8r says:

      The ex-wife is a party to the suit, so she’s entitled to be present — whether she goes is up to her. You are not a party to the suit, so you are not entitled to be in the room during the deposition. You would have to wait outside the room if the ex-wife’s attorney tells you to (which I would expect him to do).

      I really don’t know whether you attending the hearing on the matter will make any difference in the outcome. I would expect that it wouldn’t, but you should go if your husband’s lawyer thinks it’s a good idea or if you just want to provide moral support for your husband.

  16. Fern says:

    Hi,

    My question is about a case in Dade County. My brother and I were pro se parties to a lawsuit. My counts were mostly retaliation and emotional distress counts (hard to prove in FL) and so were dismissed without prejudice. My brother’s 16 counts, including fraud, defamation, unjust enrichment, breach of contract, and unjust termination remained. This has been a looong and complicated case, and even if I’m no longer a party to the case, I know everything about it and we have always worked together. I also have always gone to the hearings with him without a problem. Defendants have tried for 9 years to prevent us from moving forward, which even required us to go to Appellate court (we won), but now the judge had enough and sanctioned them making them pay for our depositions. Not only are they extremely upset, but they even signed outside co-counsel to help them now! The thing is that my brother is not as proficient in English as I am (or as verbal), so they really hate me, and to intimidate him, and get me out of the picture, they filed a Protective Order to prevent me from attending hearings and depositions. He will respond to the Motion, objecting it, of course, but here are my questions:

    1. Are there any statutes or case law we could look into to support the objection that you know/could share?
    2. Do you have any suggestions as to what we could do to object this? I was thinking whether my brother could give me a power of attorney to simply help him with the deposition. I would be quiet, but I could help with exhibits, pass notes, etc. Would that have any weight?

    I really would appreciate your answer! Thank you so much for your informative post!

    • fl_litig8r says:

      Your question opens up so many cans of worms, I don’t know where to start. I assume that even though your case has been dismissed you will still be a witness in your brother’s case (if not, then ignore the following arguments about the tainting of non-party witnesses). With respect to depositions, the sequestration (exclusion) of non-party witnesses has been a contentious issue in Florida for well over a decade. This Florida Bar Journal article gives a good overview of the history and current state of this matter, and cites the two biggest cases in Florida on this subject. Long story short, trial courts that fall in the jurisdiction of the First DCA (district court of appeal) will likely rule that you can’t automatically exclude non-party witnesses from depositions and courts in the Fourth DCA will likely rule that you can. I say “likely” because since these two courts issued their conflicting opinions on the matter, the Florida legislature passed Fla.Stat. §90.616, which, as you can tell by reading the above-cited article, addresses this issue but does not explicitly resolve it either way because it refers to sequestration at “proceedings” without saying whether depositions are proceedings. Dade County is in the Third DCA, which, as far as I can tell, has never ruled on this issue and could go either way. Because there are conflicting decisions by two other DCAs and no resolution of the conflict by the Florida Supreme Court, the courts of the Third DCA are free to choose either option.

      It gets even more complicated, though. The issue addressed in the above-referenced cases was only whether non-party witnesses could be automatically excluded from depositions. If your court takes the position that they can, you’ve already lost and your only potential recourse would be on appeal. However, even if the court takes the position that they can’t, Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.280(c)(5) states that upon a showing of “good cause”, the court can enter a protective order holding that “discovery be conducted with no one present except persons designated by the court”.

      So what constitutes “good cause”? That’s largely within the discretion of the trial court to determine. The First DCA case which ruled that witnesses couldn’t be automatically excluded, Smith v. Southern Baptist Hosp. of Fla. Inc., discussed this specific issue and stated that the mere fear that the non-party witness’s testimony would be influenced by another witness’s testimony (fear of perjury due to hearing the testimony of another witness) is not enough to show “good cause”. Your judge may disagree, but you should make that counter-argument if the defendant argued this in his motion. You should also make it clear that you do not intend to coach your brother or interfere with the deposition in any way (that means no objections!) — that you are merely there to help organize his paperwork, and if necessary and approved by defense counsel, help your brother understand the questions if he is unclear due to a language barrier.

      As far as hearings go, I don’t really see any authority either way on non-party family members being permitted to attend or excluded. I think this argument will boil down to the role you will play at the hearing, which brings me to a huge issue: unlicensed practice of law (UPL). You cannot act as your brother’s lawyer at either depositions or hearings. That means no objecting, no arguing and no feeding him arguments to make (you can’t get around this prohibition by whispering in his ear or passing him notes and having him parrot you).

      Additionally, do not ever refer to yourself as his paralegal or legal assistant, even in jest. There are two Florida Bar Ethics Rules, Rule 4-5.3 and Rule 10-2.1 that make it clear that the only people who get to use these titles are those who are working under licensed attorneys. I know that one would think that a pro se litigant could have a legal assistant just like a lawyer can, but for your own good never refer to yourself as such.

      My suggestion would be to present yourself merely as his “organizer” and “potential translator”, should that need arise. I can’t envision the court handicapping a pro se litigant by allowing an attorney to have someone present at a hearing to organize and hand him his paperwork and caselaw (I’ve never heard of a paralegal being excluded from a hearing) and not allowing a pro se litigant the same type of ministerial assistance, albeit without the title. Again, I need to emphasize that you won’t be able to make arguments for your brother or do much more than hand him paperwork as needed and help him with any language issues. You should sell yourself to the court that way in your opposition to the defendant’s motion, and make your intention not to violate the UPL rules clear. Attack any assertion that the defendant has made of “good cause” regarding excluding you from the hearing. He won’t even have the “witness may get tainted” argument he’d have regarding depositions, so I’m guessing that he argued that you would act like a lawyer if you were allowed to attend hearings. That is really mere speculation, and the court should not accept it as good cause. Argue that should you inadvertently cross the line at the hearing, the judge could always admonish you or kick you out at that time. There’s no need to bar you in advance, and there’s no reason that hearings need to be private unless it is a hearing on a particularly delicate matter, which can be decided on a hearing-by-hearing basis.

      With respect to your “power of attorney” idea, I don’t think it would fly. I think the court would see it as an obvious sham just to try to get around the UPL rules.

      • Fern says:

        Thank you so much for your prompt and detailed response. I truly appreciated it! Yes, they’re saying that I could act as a lawyer, even though they know that we simply work together and discuss everything. For nine years, I have attended hearings without an issue from the judge, so this is purely coming from their desire to intimidate him. Yes, that’s the role I wanted to play at the deposition, being quiet and simply help him with exhibits, notes, etc. Besides, although they’re considering me a witness, they have no desire to depose me (and have said so), so I have a question, could my brother depose me?
        Thank you, again, for your invaluable help!

        • fl_litig8r says:

          I would argue that their fear of you acting as a lawyer at the deposition or hearings is pure speculation (which you dispute) and not the “good cause” required to grant their motion. Just because you advocated on your own behalf at prior hearings while you were still a party doesn’t mean that you will violate the UPL rules and do so on your brother’s behalf in the future.

          With respect to whether your brother can depose you, technically he can — but tactically, it would be a terrible decision. He can talk to you whenever he wants, so there’s no need to depose you to gain information. You’re just giving the other side a free chance to get information without them even having to pay for a depo. If you want to use your testimony to dispute a motion, like a motion for summary judgment, you can do that by affidavit. There’s simply no benefit to him deposing you.

          • Fern says:

            Thank you! Yes, that’s what I figured. I only asked about the deposition because they’re saying I’m a witness, but the reality is that they don’t want to depose me, so why would they want to sequester me? If it makes no sense for my brother to depose me, their argument is kind of silly…that’s what I was thinking…Thank you for clarifying it! 🙂

          • fl_litig8r says:

            It sounds like they’ve argued that they want you out of the room for fear that you’ll act like a lawyer, but if they’ve also argued that they don’t want you tainted as a witness, you should certainly include in your memorandum in opposition to the motion the fact that defense counsel told you he has no intention to depose you — maybe support that with an affidavit saying that he made that representation to you. Put him on the hot seat if he’s misleading the judge about his reasons for wanting you out of the room. Let him explain why he argued about witness tainting when he told you he wasn’t going to depose you anyway.

  17. Fern says:

    Also, if I’m allowed to the deposition, could I take notes for him while he and/or witnesses answer so that he can focus on the witness?

    • fl_litig8r says:

      Sure, you can take all the notes you want — of course, the depo is already being recorded, so I don’t know how useful that would be. If you’re planning on taking notes and then passing him ideas for questioning during the deposition based on those notes, you’re entering UPL territory — so, I’d suggest that if you do take notes, you keep them to yourself. If you take a break during the depo, I’d see no problem with you showing him your notes, but again, once you start talking about suggesting questions you risk running afoul of UPL rules.

      • Fern says:

        Great! Thank you again…you have NO idea how helpful you have been, really! 🙂 As long as I can talk to him during the break, I’m good! LOL! I hope I didn’t bother you too much with so many questions! 🙂

        • fl_litig8r says:

          Don’t think that you’ll be able to take breaks at will. Usually, short depositions (1 hour or less) go without a single break. I’d think that your brother would be able to take one break at most. Many lawyers, towards the end of an important deposition, will ask for a 10-minute break just to go over their notes and make sure that they’ve covered everything they wanted before wrapping things up. Because this is pretty common, they may not take issue with it if your brother does it. Just be very discrete if you’re going to try to help him come up with questions — take it out in the hall (or outside) away from the court reporter and everyone else.

          • Fern says:

            Yes, definitely, I’ll be very careful! I think these will be quite long depositions…we’re thinking close to 4 hours, so he was calculating about 10 minutes per hour or so, and I checked the place they chose and it has separate break rooms, so I guess it could be there.

  18. Fern says:

    If I may abuse a bit your generosity here… I have another question… I know opposing counsel could be deposed as long as there is no breach in work-product and attorney-client privilege in what is being questioned, so could the attorney be deposed, for example, on production process? Say: Where did you look for X document? What other efforts have you made to try an find it? Who did you ask for it? Why that person? etc.
    Thank you so much! 🙂

    • fl_litig8r says:

      I doubt that a judge would let you depose opposing counsel for that purpose. What documents are you asking about? His client’s documents? If so, the answers would necessarily infringe on the attorney-client privilege, because attorneys get documents from their clients by asking their clients for them. We generally don’t go looking for client’s records on our own (in fact, I can’t ever recall doing that in over 15 years). If you’re talking about documents other than the client’s documents, you’re probably still infringing on the work product privilege, and this raises the question of why you don’t just get these documents yourself via subpoena.

      If you think that a thorough search for documents was not done, depose the client about it — he’s the one who would have conducted the search. This is what a lawyer would do. I just can’t see what possible questions you would have for the lawyer that wouldn’t infringe on the attorney-client privilege or work product, at least with respect to his response to a request for production. The court is almost certainly going to prevent you from deposing the lawyer once the lawyer asks for a protective order.

      • Fern says:

        Thank you. The Court has compelled opposing counsel 5 times to produce, and he hasn’t still. The clients we would need to depose are deceased, and the corporation says that they gave all they had…we’re talking employee contracts that the corporation should have copies of, so it’s highly improbable that it is true…besides, every time they are compelled they simply add one (practically irrelevant) new thing and keep ignoring the rest…I figured that asking who he asked about the documents, or where he looked, would help identify who to depose further…

        • fl_litig8r says:

          I still think the court won’t let you depose the attorney because there’s an easier way to accomplish what you want, through a “corporate designee” deposition. Find your state rule of civil procedure for depositions. It should have an analogue for Federal Rule 30(b)(6). Rule 30(b)(6) lets you set the deposition of a corporate representative with the most knowledge on the subject you identify. In your deposition notice under Rule 30(b)(6), you don’t state the name of a person you want to depose. Rather, you state that you want to depose “the corporate designee with the most knowledge about the following subject (or subjects)”, and then you name the subjects. The corporation is then obliged to produce the person or persons with the most knowledge in the subjects you identified.

          In your case, you could state that you want to depose the corporate designee(s) with the most knowledge about the maintenance and storage (and maybe destruction) of the corporate records you seek. You could even make it a deposition “duces tecum” under your state equivalent of Rule 30(b)(2), which is like a combination deposition/request for production, where you command the person to bring with them the records you identify. This could make things even easier, as you’d state that you want to depose the corporate designee(s) with the most knowledge about the maintenance and storage of the records sought in the attached duces tecum request. Then they not only have to produce the documents, but the people who have the most knowledge about their maintenance and storage, so if they can’t produce the actual documents you can talk to the person who can tell you why they can’t. If they produce people who don’t meet your 30(b)(6) criteria (say they don’t know about the documents’ maintenance and storage), then you could file a motion to compel and/or motion for sanctions for their failure to produce the correct corporate representatives.

          The 30(b)(6) deposition is a very effective tool because it removes the burden from you to find out who at the corporation has knowledge about the subject you want to explore and places it on the corporation. They have to produce as many people as are required to satisfy your stated areas of interest, so you avoid the situation of everyone stating that they’re not the right person to question about a subject.

          • Fern says:

            THANK YOU!!!! You’ve been not only extremely helpful and thorough, but also incredibly gracious with your time!! I truly appreciate it!! 🙂

  19. Frank Corsone says:

    Great advice! I am in California and am a party to a complaint…am I allowed to attend depositions of other parties to the case such as my wife and brother? we are all representing ourselves…so if I can attend, is there a way I can propose objections to them without giving legal advice? thank you

    • fl_litig8r says:

      Yes, as a party, you are allowed to attend all depositions in the case. If you want to object at a deposition, there’s no need to “propose” the objection to the other party to make. You can object on your own, even when the witness is another party. Just think of how depositions work when lawyers are involved. If a third-party witness (say a witness to a car accident) testifies who isn’t represented by anyone and isn’t a party to the case, that doesn’t mean that the lawyers can’t object. We can object to questions proffered to any witness, even if they aren’t our client. Therefore, as a pro se litigant, you can object on your own to questions proffered to other witnesses. There’s no need to put on a puppet show and make your objections through your relatives — plus, this would be considered unlicensed practice of law if you did.

      All that being said, know that objections at depositions are very rare. Don’t treat the deposition like it’s a trial, because the standard rule for depositions is that you don’t waive any objections you didn’t make except for objections based on (1) privilege and (2) form of the question (e.g., leading — note that you are allowed to lead an opposing party or a hostile witness, even on direct examination; presumes facts not in evidence; mischaracterizes prior testimony; etc.). You can always object to questions and answers you think violated the evidence rules (other than the two objections mentioned) after the fact (after the deposition is transcribed). This is typically done right before trial, where each party identifies portions of the depositions it feels are objectionable and the judge rules on those objections before the jury gets to hear them. Because most objections are not waived if you don’t make them at the deposition (unlike at trial, where all objections not made are waived), it’s pretty rare for lawyers to object at depositions. If they do make objections, it’s usually only a handful of times, usually due to a poorly worded question.

      If you make frequent objections that aren’t about privilege or the form of the question (e.g., hearsay, qualifications, etc.), that’s considered bad form, as it needlessly disrupts the flow of the deposition and makes it take more time for no reason. Making needless objections could form the basis for a motion for protective order by the other side, asking the court to bar you from future depositions. While parties have the right to attend depositions, that right is not absolute, and a judge can bar a party who is being needlessly disruptive from depositions. Therefore, I suggest you don’t go overboard with making objections at the depositions.

      • Frank Corsone says:

        thank you very much…this is a very valuable service and is sincerely appreciated…

        • Frank Corsonce says:

          a related question…can a corporation direct the activities of its counsel in order to reduce costs…can they direct him NOT to attend a deposition of the PMQ or direct him NOT to attend a mediation…and take full responsibility for the outcome…are there any CCPs mandating the attorney to perform certain activities other than filing papers on behalf of the company?

          • fl_litig8r says:

            In California, as in most (if not all) other states, corporations cannot represent themselves in court except through legal counsel. This Avvo question and answer page explains this pretty thoroughly and provides a lot of citations to California cases on the subject. The rationale behind the requirement is mainly that any non-attorney appearing on behalf of a corporation would be guilty of unlicensed practice of law (UPL). Therefore, I would think that a non-attorney corporate representative could not do anything lawsuit-related which would be considered practice of law, which would include taking/defending depositions.

            I can’t think of any reason why a corporation would not be able to avoid having a lawyer present at any proceeding where a lawyer is optional, however. So, if you set a deposition of a corporate defendant and that person shows up with no lawyer by choice, I see no reason why the corporation couldn’t do that. Of course, it wouldn’t be able to object or ask any questions of its own — that would be acting like a lawyer, not a witness — so it would be pretty stupid for the corporation to try it just to save money. The same would apply to mediation. In theory, a party could attend mediation without a lawyer, unless it’s court ordered and the order requires counsel to be present. It’s not a great idea, though.

  20. Fern says:

    I just wanted to thank you for all your help, once again, the judge actually denied their motion in its entirety and appointed a Special Master so that they don’t oppress him!!

    I am truly appreciative of all your clarifications!! Your Website was truly a blessing!! 🙂

  21. Bruce says:

    I am a defendent in a real estate suit. After much time and 2 lawyers quitting for personal reasons, we have very little funds to defend the suit. My wife is being deposed and we have no attorney. What options do I have to minimize our involvement in and damage caused by the deposition.

    • fl_litig8r says:

      I’m not sure what you’re asking, especially when you say you want to minimize your involvement. If you mean that you’re going to attend the depositions without a lawyer, the only advice I can give is to listen very carefully to the questions and answer them as honestly and briefly as possible. You might want to read this article for my general deposition advice (even though it’s aimed toward personal injury plaintiffs, much of it is general advice for anyone being deposed – especially the part about not trying to “tell your story” during the deposition). Expect to take some lumps and don’t try to be too clever in giving evasive and/or deceptive answers. Most of the time, objections aren’t appropriate during depositions, so there’s no point in trying to give you an education in the rules of evidence. Objections, except as to privilege and “form of the question” (if a question is confusing/compound or assumes something that isn’t true — like a “when did you stop beating your wife”-type question), can always be raised after-the-fact before any part of the deposition reaches a jury, so you really shouldn’t worry too much about them.

      Minimizing the damage of any bad (but truthful) testimony that may be elicited is something that would require knowing everything about your case. I can’t spin what I don’t know. The absolute worst thing you can do is lie. No matter how bad a truthful answer may sound, lying will almost always hurt your case worse than telling the truth.

      I’m sorry that I can’t be more specific with my advice, but you haven’t really been very specific with your question.

  22. Robert [last name removed by admin] says:

    am I ,as husband and not a party to the case allowed to attend my wife`s deposition involving judgment by default ($16,000.00) seeking asset`s to levy ,although hospital stay was due to trans global amnesia and doctors orders are to limit stress? This 2yr attorney that represents hospital is a prick! Robert

    • fl_litig8r says:

      If you’re not a party to the underlying claim, you don’t have a right to attend the deposition. You can ask the other attorney if you can, and if he says no, you can move for leave of court to attend (no doubt with conditions of you remaining silent), but if neither the lawyer nor the judge will allow you to attend, there’s nothing you can do.

      If your wife requires certain accommodations at the deposition due to her medical issues, you can move for a protective order, asking the court to require that those accommodations (assuming that they’re reasonable and supported by her physician) are met.

  23. Tiffani1976 says:

    I have a query on deposition coming up(finally)after 3 years of now having a good attorney asap get a settlement offer(After this & after,defendant’s discovery(end of may or so)is our deadline.

    I am happy about taking my depo.(waited years to finally do this)where i know that liability is not unclear.But my son has spent numerous yrs.,on medication,too many to count premise on what happen to him in foster care,unbeknownst to me for years. My son was severely sexually abused in “foster care.”

    He said other night,mom i am nervous to see”those who let me be hurt for so long away from you & dad.”What if i say something wrong.”What if(cps)worker, dcf,etc.try to trick me like they used to do,to make you look bad
    mom,i am scared.(he is now 19,was suffering in state care a long time.)I told him he has a lawyer.The firm,will protect us.My question is,”if a child now of age(20 in 3 weeks) was diagnose with “ptsd, diagnose as”schizophrenic even,by state own dr.,since age 12/13 years old,” will he still be force to take a depo?”A report in Fla,CT,few other states demonstrate,”how some one diagnose,was not force to give depo and or limited questions etc.,”so i just want your opine on this. Thank you in advance, Fl_litig8r.(depo is coming up late april 2015)

    NOTE:The medications force-fed to him also made him forget a bunch of harm to him,(but is featured in police reports,medical)
    so can’t “Defense use that?” & or be forced,to question only on that etc.,again this is for my son,and i will share question with him thank you.”

    • fl_litig8r says:

      If your son’s depo is coming up at the end of the month, it’s a bit late to be thinking about whether a protective order should have been sought now. It’s unlikely that any court would say that he can’t be deposed at all. Many victims of traumatic experiences have had to give depositions. At best, certain accommodations may be ordered for the deposition based on suggestions by mental health professionals (who would also need to support the argument that he needs accommodation at all). Things like where the deposition can be held, how long it can be (it may be broken up over several sessions if he needs breaks) and who may be present are things the court would consider. It’s unlikely that the court would restrict lines of questioning, especially when the most problematic areas go to the heart of the case. If your son can’t remember certain things, they can still ask him about them and have him testify that he can’t remember. It’s only fair that they be allowed to ask, so if he suddenly starts testifying about these subjects at trial they aren’t deprived of the ability to impeach him with his former “I can’t remember” testimony from his deposition. You don’t get to say in advance that you don’t remember certain things and expect the defense to be precluded from asking about them because of that.

      As I said, though, it’s a bit late to be trying to limit the scope of the deposition now. Getting the medical opinions you need and getting a motion for protective order heard by the court before the end of the month doesn’t seem likely. I don’t know that it would have done much good anyway, as they likely would still be allowed by the court to ask about the most sensitive issues.

      • Tiffani1976 says:

        Evening.
        I really do thank you again and the main thing is, the lawyer also said, just be honest on,”what he do remember,as it also match up with the arrest/conviction of the guy who harm him,and the medical reports too.”

        I do know that he understand yes,”his serious injury he was force to endure,by state failing to adhere to their own policy i.e,”return him home to his siblings,and myself,that he do understand he is the heart and soul,of the suit for high damages. So thanks again.He even was nodding his head,reading this tonight with me, Fl_Litig8r…
        &

        Last part of this most relevant question is:
        He remember the most “brutal attack on him supporting again by dr.exam and report.”
        That is naturally one he do remember,also a
        “incident involving pushing,shoving him and i know bullying by peers in the group home and how the “supervisor cps he told,but she ignore him a few times,and it got worse.”
        Question is:
        Now,if my son, start to get “too emotional, again he can take a break,as you are saying, i.e, crying.(i am assuming this is ok)correct.
        and or simply also say,”i do not want to go on because i am just too “emotional,the memory of it all etc.” just want clear answer on that.”

        We are overall just happy FL, we are able to finally get some traction on the depo’s
        and it feel good. I am a open book,so i do not care what they ask me,because i have done nothing wrong. (state clear me)after years of having him away from me,and my spouse.
        Yet,still never let him come home to “after” all damage to him was done.Feel good for me to finally also know the defendants will be soon depose too.(the main workers at cps)finally who avoid questioning for years,liability etc.”

        • fl_litig8r says:

          It’s pretty common to allow a break during a deposition when a witness gets too emotional. I’ve had this happen a number of times. Usually, the person can continue after 10-20 minutes of cooling off, but obviously your son’s case is pretty extreme. I would advise against him trying to end the deposition entirely, or refusing to answer questions. If it gets bad enough that short break is insufficient for him to go on, your lawyer can try to work something out with the defense attorney, such as continuing the deposition another day. I can say with almost absolute certainty that the defense attorney doesn’t want to traumatize your son. He or she just wants to effectively defend his client, so he has to ask tough questions. His goal isn’t to make your son cry or break down. I’m sure that he realizes how sensitive the situation is and he’ll try to get the information he needs without doing anything that would stall the deposition. If he were dealing with someone he thought was faking an injury he might be bit more brutal, but it seems that in your son’s case it’s kind of a given that he suffered a sexual trauma and the only issue is the defendant’s liability for it, so I’d expect defense counsel to conduct himself with sensitivity to your son’s condition. Defense lawyers are often demonized by plaintiffs and plaintiffs’ lawyers, but most of them are decent people just doing a job. I think your son will be accommodated in an appropriate fashion, even without a protective order.

          • Tiffani1976 says:

            Thank you Fl…and may you have a great weekend,and week coming up. You’re the best imo online with such truthful answers,and opine on a situation,,that most in your field,(and i’ve met many lawyers nationally that is)You seem to really be on point,with well written answers, not just a few words,of “this or that.”so thank you.

            My “son”just said thanks too..
            I am confident it will be ok,as he understand the main proof is a man was convicted of it,and there is no way getting around at least that,as the other multiple things that should’ve not happen to him,if returned to his parents. So our lawyer did remind him of that,and added how significant it is,”no matter what defense counsel attempt to do…”Just be honest and we both will throughout,the lawyer said it will be”over”before we know it.”
            Lawyer said,it would’ve been much harder,IF there was 1.)no conviction of a sex crime)but that families across our nation win even without it,but this cement his claim,the law team said,so he just really has to stay focus on what happen,what he remember,and yes,he will take a break if warranted,and most important the lawyer will be there with us,she said all the way(and will OBJECT if it is warranted etc.)But should go well,and she will be meeting with my son again 2 more times prior to depo to help him with anything else he need prior.
            Thanks, you are really awesome.

          • fl_litig8r says:

            I hope you and your son resolve your case favorably.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *