/

Tumblr

/

Linkedin

The Barrister’s Toolbox

Category: Rule 26

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
Expert Witness Reports – Avoiding Litigation Sand Traps – What They Should and Should Not Include

You have hired an expert and are in need of a report or findings for you expert disclosures. What do you do? Here is a short checklist of things to consider: 1. Compliance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26. This probably is a good place to start. The Rule provides in pertinent part →

Evidence, exclusion of witnesses, experts, Rule 26, rule 702, Rule 704, Rules of Evidence, Trial Advocacy, Trial Rules

/

/

Feb 26, 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
Discovery, Privacy, Personal Freedom and Social Media

I don’t see myself as a hero because what I’m doing is self-interested: I don’t want to live in a world where there’s no privacy and therefore no room for intellectual exploration and creativity. Edward Snowden There is an assault on our privacy. We need look no further than headlines involving Russian hacking of our →

computer, Discovery, Evidence, Facebook, Fishing expedition, Privacy, Rule 26, Rule 34, Trial Rules

/

/

Dec 14, 2016
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