The Barrister's Toolbox
    • About
    • Have a Question?
  • Home
  • richcooklaw.com

/

Tumblr

/

Linkedin

The Barrister’s Toolbox

Category: depositions

  • Deposition of a Party or Witness and the Power of Dignified Demeanor

    Remind your client or witness of their freedom to choose their attitude and the power they have to control their demeanor. This advice will empower and cut short abusive questioning at trial or during a deposition. →

    depositions, dos and don’ts, testimony, Trial Advocacy

    /

    /

    Mar 6, 2022
  • Misbehaving and Dealing with the Same During a Deposition

    Depositions are legal proceedings which are not typically officiated by a court officer. During such affairs attorneys can behave quite badly. Such behavior can range from simple rudeness to conduct that borders on criminal conduct such as threats of bodily harm or emotional charges to go outside and handle the matter like a man. Needless →

    depositions, Discovery, Rule 26, Rule 30, Termination of deposition, testimony, Trial Rules

    /

    Civil procedure, Deposition, Depositions, problems, Rule 30

    /

    Dec 19, 2017
  • Readying Your Experts for Traps and Tough Questions

    Depositions are dangerous time for your expert.  Dangerous traps lies just around the corner. You cannot relax.  Here are some thoughts on this important topic. 1. Tendencies of your expert: If you can obtain and read past depositions of your expert to see not only what type of questions are asked but how he reacts. →

    depositions, Direct examination, Discovery, dos and don’ts, Evidence, experts, Rule 26, Rule 30, Rule 32, rule 702, Rule 704, Rules of Evidence, testimony, Trial Rules

    /

    Depositions, Discovery, Evidence, expert, preparation, Rule 26, Rule 30, Rule 32

    /

    May 1, 2017
  • Guarding Your Expert from Aggressive Counsel

      Preparation is your greatest tool to avoid problems caused by difficult or agressive attorneys. Ultimately, once you are at the deposition there is little you can do without risking sanctions. Harassing behavior. If an attorney engages in ongoing harassing behavior which is truly beyond the pale, call the magistrate of court and have a →

    depositions, experts, Rule 30, Rule 32, Termination of deposition, Trial Rules

    /

    abusive, expert, Rule 30, Rule 32, Rule 37, sanctions, Termination of deposition

    /

    Apr 23, 2017
  • Proper Objections at Your Expert’s Deposition

      Palais de justice historique de Lyon, France Objections should be kept to a minimum. The Rules contemplate that objections should be concise and afford the examiner the opportunity to cure the objection. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(c)(2) (noting that “objection[s] must be stated concisely”); id., Advisory Committee Notes (1993 Amendments) (noting that “[d]epositions →

    depositions, Direct examination, Discovery, dos and don’ts, Evidence, experts, rule 702, Rule 704, Rules of Evidence, Trial Advocacy, Trial Rules

    /

    /

    Jan 15, 2017
  • Expert Witness Retainer Agreements – Striking the Right Deal.

    Here are points to consider: 1. Cannot be a contingent fee arrangement. This is unethical and would be disastrous regardless… enough said. 2. Cost of initial consultation. This should be free or nominal, but make sure this is clear. 3. Definition of scope of work. This should be set out in the initial engagement letter →

    computer, depositions, Evidence, exclusion of witnesses, experts, rule 101, Rule 102, Rule 26, Rules of Evidence, separation of witnesses, testimony, Trial Advocacy

    /

    /

    Jan 7, 2017
  • The Case Against Experts in the Courtroom

    “If you can’t explain it to a six year old, you don’t understand it yourself.” Albert Einstein I have always thought it is unclear whether Indiana Rule of Evidence (IRE) 615 applies to depositions. IRE 101(C) states: Rules Inapplicable. The rules, other than those with respect to privileges, do not apply in the following situations: →

    depositions, Evidence, exclusion of witnesses, experts, rule 101, Rule 102, Rule 26, Rule 30, Rule 32, Rule 43, Rule 615, rule 702, Rule 704, Rules of Evidence, separation of witnesses, testimony, Trial Advocacy, Trial Rules

    /

    Adversarial system, Civil procedure

    /

    Oct 15, 2015
  • Teaching Your Client How to Mind Their Manners While on the Stand

    It costs you nothing to be a gentleman or lady.  However, a lack of civility can be very costly.  The manner in which a witness or party testifies is critical to their credibility and understandability to the jury. You want witnesses to testify in a natural manner, but they need to be understood and well →

    depositions, testimony, Trial Advocacy

    /

    courtroom etiquette, credibility, demeanor, Deposition, manners, testimony, witness preparation

    /

    Jul 8, 2015
  • Witness Outlines: Which came first, the question or the answer…

    You getting ready for trial and you are outlining your examination, so how should you do it? What? There is more than one way to outline your questioning? Well, yes… There is. Buddy Yosha, the Melvin Belli of The Midwest, meticulously outlines his examination and writes out every question and expected answer. He also uses →

    depositions, Trial Advocacy

    /

    Buddy Yosha, direct examination, Melvin Belli, outlines, witness preparation

    /

    May 26, 2014
  • Deposition Preparation Short List

    Here is a short list of items to cover with your client the next time you have a discovery deposition: 1. Listen and make sure you understand the question. 2. Stop for five seconds and think. 3. Answer the question. 4. Is there more than one answer that is correct? 5. If there is, then →

    depositions

    /

    /

    May 7, 2013
  • Trial Post-Mortem

    If you try cases long enough, you are going to eventually lose a few.  You need to look at losses as an opportunity to improve.   Quite honestly you should learn more from your loses, than your victories.  If your are allowed, you should speak with the jurors and see what they thought was important. →

    closing arguments, depositions, Evidence, Jury Selection, Trial Advocacy

    /

    /

    Jun 15, 2012
  • Litigation Against an Organization: Why you need to do a Rule 30(B)(6) deposition.

    If you are suing an organization, it is important that you familiarize yourself with the provisions of Rule 30(b)(6).  Rule of Procedure 30(b)(6) provides in pertinent part: Notice or Subpoena Directed to an Organization. In its notice or subpoena, a party may name as the deponent a public or private corporation, a partnership, an association, a governmental agency, or →

    depositions, Evidence

    /

    Civil procedure, Deposition, organization, Rule 30, Rules of evidence

    /

    Jun 14, 2012
  • Integrity: A Client’s Most Valuable Asset

    Clients sometime forget what is their case’s greatest asset. It is not the great photos, their expert witness, or even their attorney. The greatest asset their case has is the Client’s integrity and credibility as a witness. If a claims adjuster, an insurance defense attorney or jury thinks your client is a liar why would →

    depositions, Trial Advocacy

    /

    /

    Apr 5, 2012
  • Coaching the Witness: How to Handle the Speaking Objection.

    You are in a deposition and you are hammering an opposing witness. The witness has backed off of her speed estimate and is just about to concede she has no real basis to estimate her speed when the opposing attorney interrupts and launches into a speech: Q. So, you would have to guess or speculate →

    depositions, Evidence, Trial Advocacy

    /

    /

    Mar 26, 2012
  • Strategies for the Cross-Examination of Experts

    In my last post, I discussed what a trial attorney can do to prepare for the cross-examination of an adverse expert. Below are some strategies that can be used in successfully cross-examining an adverse expert witness: 1. Favorable Evidence: One tactic that should not be ignored is using the opposing party’s expert to concede to →

    cross-examination, depositions, Evidence, Trial Advocacy

    /

    /

    Mar 7, 2012
  • Cross-Examination of Experts: Where to Start.

    Where do you start with your preparation to cross-examine an expert? The following is a list of areas to review: 1. The Expert’s Curriculum Vita: You should thoroughly review the expert’s c.v. Expert’s will exaggerate and even make up credentials. In a criminal case I was defending the State’s expert, an environmental specialist, claimed he →

    cross-examination, depositions, Evidence, Trial Advocacy

    /

    Cross-examination, Expert Witness

    /

    Feb 27, 2012
  • After the Party’s Over: How to Handle a Deposition Errata Sheet

    So you have carefully prepared the client for deposition, you have scoured his discovery responses and medical records for any problems, contradictions, omissions and the deposition of your client is over, now what? Upon receipt of the deposition, you, your paralegal and client need to carefully review the transcript for any discrepancies or inaccuracies. You →

    depositions, Evidence

    /

    /

    Dec 21, 2011
  • Refreshing Recollection vs. Past Recollection Recorded

    Refreshing Recollection. A client needs to be thoroughly familiarized with what it means to forget as opposed to not knowing something. If one says, “I don’t know,” something, that means it was never in their brain. “I don’t remember,” on the other hand, means that the information was once in their brain, but cannot be →

    depositions, Evidence, Trial Advocacy

    /

    Evidence; Rule 612; Rule 803(5); Refreshing Recollection;Past Recollection Recorded

    /

    Oct 4, 2011
  • How to Avoid Bad Questions and Answers

    Helping your client refresh their memory regarding facts pertinent to the case is just the beginning of your job in preparing your client to testify at their deposition. You also need prepare your client for problem areas of questioning. The following is a list of problem questions and how to deal with them during the →

    depositions, Trial Advocacy

    /

    Depositions, witness preparation

    /

    Oct 2, 2011

Rich Cook has been practicing law for over 40 years and has been recognized by his peers for his contributions to the development of personal injury law and trial advocacy in the State of Indiana.

Since entering private practice, Rich has handled a wide range of matters involving claims of personal injury, wrongful death, automobile collisions, medical malpractice, product liability, job site injuries, insurance disputes, breach of contract, defamation, sexual harassment claims, civil rights claims, class actions, and construction site injuries.

Blog at WordPress.com.

Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
 

Loading Comments...
 

    • Subscribe Subscribed
      • The Barrister's Toolbox
      • Join 104 other subscribers
      • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
      • The Barrister's Toolbox
      • Subscribe Subscribed
      • Sign up
      • Log in
      • Report this content
      • View site in Reader
      • Manage subscriptions
      • Collapse this bar