Tower of Babble

I've asked the questions at many depositions. I try to approach it with purpose; trying to obtain information, clarify the facts, find out what happened and what did not happen. It's a challenge, bordering on fun. However, taking a deposition through an interpreter is not fun.

I have asked questions through interpreters in Spanish, French, Italian, Russian, Greek, Polish, Chinese (Mandarin, Cantonese, Fukanese, Taiwanese), Japanese, Portugese, Hindi, Urdu, Bengali, Arabic, Hebrew, Creole, Tagalog (a Filipino dialect), and ASL (American Sign Language). I never had German, either because German's all speak English or they don't have too many car accidents. I never took a deposition with a Yiddish interpreter, but I did see one used in court (Brooklyn, of course). Depositions with interpreters share common problems. Here are a few:

1. Some questions do not interpret well. In a car accident case, a lot of lawyers like to start with this question "Did there come a time when the vehicle you were driving came into contact with another vehicle." It's not a great question, it's compound and it can be confusing. Lawyers like it because it establishes certain things: there WAS an accident, with CONTACT, this witness was there, and there was another vehicle involved. I asked five different Spanish interpreters to translate this question, so I could listen to it with my high school Spanish background. They interpreted the question five different ways. One thing about this question IS consistent. When you ask a Spanish speaking witness, through an interpreter, the question "Did there come a time when the vehicle you were driving came into contact with another vehicle", the answer is always the same: "QUE???"

So you have the interpreter ask the question again, and the witness says, "The accident happened at 7 o'clock." or, "You mean was I in an accident?" or "QUE???"

2. Sometimes witnesses want an interpreter, but they actually speak English pretty well. If they understand your question they answer in English. If they don't understand the question, or, if they don't like the question, they wait for the interpreter. I don't let witnesses do this. It's all or nothing. Either no interpreter, or I want the interpreter to do a literal translation of every question and answer.

3. A related problem is when you ask a detailed question, the interpreter interprets it, the witness gives a long response in Urdu, and the interpreter translates it as "Yes". Sitting there, you know the interpreter and the witness have had a dialogue about the question, and the interpreter has taken it upon himself to "paraphrase" an answer. If this happens, I state on the record what has just occurred, then ask the reporter to read back my question and ask the interpreter to do a literal interpretation of the question and answer. If they don't do it, I advise opposing counsel that if this is not corrected I am busting the deposition. I have done that a few times, and I know other attorneys who have too.

4. Sometimes the interpreter is just not great at the particular language. They may have the credentials to do both Mandarin and Cantonese, but they are native to Mandarin and have learned Cantonese. What do you do when they just don't know the word? You see them struggling and they don't know how to say "windshield wiper" in Cantonese. So they try some combination of words like "car glass cleaner" and the witness says the Cantonese equivalent of "Que?" so the interpreter tries the Mandarin word for windshield wiper, and now the witness is mad at the interpreter and says nothing. Finally, the interpreter translates your question in Cantonese, but when he comes to "windshield wiper" he says "windshield wiper," and the witness says "Ohhhh, windshield wiper.." and answers the question.

5. Sometimes, when questioning an English speaking witness, you want to call in an interpreter who speaks "Stupidese," but that is a topic for another day.

Depositions Part 2

You CAN win a case taking your opponents deposition.

It won't be true in every case, but there are some cases where you can see it might happen, and you should have a strategy regarding how you are going to do it. Taking a deposition is all about "nailing down facts". I like to question a witness about something that I KNOW is in a document, before I question about the document. If I can elicit testimony about how a document was produced, and the witness' awareness of it, and its reliability, I go for it. When I then produce the document and ask for specific identifications and admissions, the witness cannot escape.

Sometimes a witness will make a stunning admission during a deposition. If you pick up on this, do not tip your hand, but DO have the witness confirm what he has said, and keep narrowing down the questions to make the admissions stronger. Don't let on to what you have, but KEEP GOING for more, as much as you can get.

If a witness is being evasive about an issue, do not accept this at face value, make a record that helps you if you need to make a motion to compel. Witnesses will often admit that a document or record exists "but its not here". Confirming that it exists, and where it might be, and what its all about, are all worth making a record.

As mindful as I am about leaving "openings" for my own witness, I really try to close all the openings for an adversary. If I think something happened a certain way, but there are possible other ways, and the witness will testify in a way that closes off the other possibilities (if only you ask).....ASK!!!!

I am almost never confrontational with opposing witnesses at a deposition. I try to be clear and calm and direct. I try never to let them fluster me, and I want to convey that I have all the time in the world, and that I will keep asking questions until they answer what I want to know. You would be surprised how often an initially belligerant witness will capitulate and start answering directly, if they know you are going to keep at it, and not embarrass them.

If you think the witness may not appear later and his transcript will be used, prepare your questions this way, so you have a useful transcript.

If you got almost everything you wanted and needed, and think you can win the case on a motion for summary judgment, go for it. A motion for summary judgment is an overlooked discovery tool. More on this tomorrow....

Depositions Part 1

You can't win a case at your clients deposition, but you CAN lose it.

I have handled depositions for other attorneys, where part of my assignment was to "prep the client". This can be a very uncomfortable situation. I have had prepped plaintiffs in a trip and fall case where they "didn't know where the accident happened". Another time the plaintiff told me "I guess I just fell". Another time, in a pedestrian knockdown case, the plaintiff told me he ran in front of a parked bus and then got nailed by a car which could not see him, because his friend had motioned to him that it was safe. What did their attorneys of record expect ME to do? What is "prep" in a case like that? I know that in those situations, the clients testimony is going to doom the case if I don't advise them properly. It's a dicey proposition..... how far you can go? I try to explain to the client the importance of the deposition, the purpose for it, and the consequences of the answers. Sometimes this is the first time the client realizes there is more to the case than "I got hurt, when do I get paid?". If I have to educate another lawyer's client about proving liability, shame on the lawyer, BUT, I will do it.

When I have depositions for my own clients, and the luxury of proper prep, here are a few helpful suggestions for proper prep:

1. I emphasize to the client that we are not there to "testify" or "prove the case" or "convince". We are there because the law gives the adversary the right to get more information about the case. However, they are going to have to work for it. Therefor, most importantly....."LISTEN TO THE QUESTION ASKED, AND ANSWER JUST THAT QUESTION". The way I illustrate this to the client is to say "If the question is.....'Did there come a time when you were involved in a motor vehicle accident', the answer to that question is 'YES'". That's it, let them ask you the details, answer the question asked and STOP.

2. THINK before you answer. The deposition is recorded on a written transcript, but the transcript will not show if you hesitate or think. If you need to think, think. If you are not sure what a question means, ask for it to be clarified.

3. Remember that the defense lawyer needs to establish what your claim IS, and what it ISN'T. Therefor, you will answer certain questions, especially about your damages or injuries, in the negative. Don't worry if you can't say yes to every question about your injuries.

4. The one time you can speak expansively is when asked about how your injuries affect you. Remember, when the questions start to be "is there anything else", your agreeing that there is nothing else will be used to limit your damages claim.

5. If there is some key element on liability, and you know the defendant will focus on it (like NOTICE in a premises cases, or damages threshold in an auto case), emphasize this to the client and go over these issues carefully. Ask sample questions and talk to the client about the answers.

6. Some clients don't know what to expect, and are so nervous they don't absorb your prep. I always explain to an inexperienced client that we will NOT be in court, there will be no judge or jury present, we will be sitting around a table, that I will be there next to you, that the deposition will not be much different than our prep, and that being nervous does not help (though I understand you may be anyway). I really work hard to calm a nervous client before we start, because these clients can fall apart in disastrous ways.

You should NOT let a case be lost by a poor deposition, and the onus is on YOU to control this.

Tomorrow, you can't lose your case taking your adversaries deposition, but you CAN win it.