I'm kinda confused about how to do the headings in this depo. There were four attys and they were all over the place in their questions, like this..

atty 1
atty 2
atty 3
3 gets cut off by 2, who asks quite a few questions, more than I would think should go in colloquy.
back to atty 2

The firm's general practice is to do


So when he butts in so do say REEXAMINATION or FURTHER EXAMINATION?

and when it goes back to her is it REEXAMINATION or EXAMINATION (Continued) or..?


Views: 48

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Unless the questioning attorney has acquiesced the questioning, keep the interrupter on colloquy and not q and a and just continue with by mr. so and so: q. for the questioning attorney.

If it goes on for more than two pages, you could probably put:

and when the original questioning attorney (or any attorney that questions after previously having a section of questioning):


Usually they will say something to let you know someone else is questioning.

The reason it sometimes gets sticky is because if the questioning attorney (also the noticing attorney) is paying an expert, for example, $600 an hour and the expert only has designated or agreed to 2 hours, the questioning attorney is not going to want to give up any of his very expensive time and sometimes an attorney who is not paying will try to get his questions in on someone else's dime. That doesn't really matter as far as the format, but it's just to explain why one may not wish to actually let the other know he has the floor. He may take more than a couple-question time period and figure he gets to ask all his stuff right then.
Heck, the way I'm feeling tonight about the transcript I'm on -- PULLING MY HAIR OUT -- I'd just make it a free-for-all. Throw 'em all in colloquy, and forget about the Q and A. If they want a roundtable discussion, then, by George, I'd give it to 'em.
Okay. In all seriousness, I'd do something like this:


Q. Do you feel as bad as you look?
A. Of course, I do. I'm here, aren't I?

Q. Well, then why didn't you put on a suit and tie?
A. I like wearing shorts.

Q. Did I hear you right that you like wearing shorts?
A. Yes.

Q. Where did you buy those shorts?
A. At Target. Can't you tell?

MR. JOHNSON: At Target? I have a pair just like them.

Q. Where is the Target store?
A. Down on Main Street.

MR. MILLER: Did he say Main Street?
THE WITNESS: Yes, Main Street, right by the Starbucks.

Well, you get the picture. HTH!
Some people only change examination if there's a page or two or more of questioning. In CA, most people do examination, examination (continued), further examination (keep doing further examination after that and k.i.s.s. because it doesn't really matter in depo anyway -- at least in these parts.

In other states, the format is different, but the key thing to remember is CONSISTENCY! Pick a format or layout and stick to it like glue.

Hope it helps,
I'd do it like Jeanese suggested, one, just like she said, so they can
see how much of a butinsky they were, and two for the
pages!! you deserve those extra lines/pages, girl!!!

and don't sweat it! if they ever read the transcript in court
everyone will see how out of control it was, and that type
of situation is not in the reporter's control. so cest'le vie.

and smile all the way to the bank!!!
sorry, Heather, I don't mean to seem so calous, attys
are like that in court too! the only difference is the
judge is sitting right there and they don't want to
make him mad at them.
I would also leave them in colloquy and not Q and A. But this discussion brought up something I haven't heard of before. I always use "EXAMINATION" as a heading even if it is the second or third time it's been that attorney's turn. Is that wrong? I've never used "FURTHER EXAMINATION" or any of the others. Did I miss that, or is that possibly agency preference?
I just went on an old computer and pulled up three depositions from different companies. Check out the differences of how they are set up on the Contents page:

Company No. 1:

EXAMINATION BY: ............................... PAGE

Counsel for the Plaintiff......................4, 154
Counsel for the Defendant................14, 156

Company No. 2:

WITNESS.........................EXAMINATION BY COUNSEL

Joe Blow
By Mr. Smith......................................4


Counsel for the Plaintiffs:
Page 23, line 12, through page 24, line 16

Counsel for the Plaintiffs:
Page 54, line 21, through page 55, line 4

Company No. 3:

DEPONENT: Joe Blow.................................................PAGE

Examination by Mr. Smith, Counsel for Plaintiff............4
Examination by Ms. Jones, Counsel for Defendant......50

I don't insert all those periods in a row, but I had to do it on this forum to show the space between the columns, as the forum software won't let you insert multiple spaces in a row.

I never use "FURTHER' either,
but if a witness is continued from day 1 to day 2,
then I put the heading as:


I'm in California and I do the three-question rule (my rule). Up to three questions, it's colloquy. After three, it all goes into Q&A, and EVERY heading gets EXAMINATION. I don't worry about "further" or "cont'd." I've been doing this since '82 and have never had it questioned or commented upon.
Judy, Judy, Judy -- I just wanted to say that a la Cary Grant! ;-)

Actually, what I REALLY wanted to say is I like your three-question rule. That solves all problems. Good remedy, one which I'm going to file away in my memory banks.
I use five questions, only because my judge will
occasionally ask a few questions of the witness
and rather than set him up, I wait until he has asked
five (or six) questions.

in depos, 3 is a good number


Latest Activity

Harman Singh commented on Kelli Combs (admin)'s group Proofreaders
4 hours ago
Harman Singh joined Kelli Combs (admin)'s group
5 hours ago
Kelli Combs (admin) left a comment for APEX COURT REPORTING
5 hours ago
APEX COURT REPORTING joined Cassandra's group
6 hours ago
APEX COURT REPORTING joined April Floyd's group
6 hours ago
Sheri Abraham posted a status
"Can somebody give me guidance on how to prepare an ATF Admin hearing transcript? I have no idea what the title page would look like. TIA!"
11 hours ago
Kelli Combs (admin) left a comment for Linda Troxel
12 hours ago
Kelli Combs (admin) left a comment for Harman Singh
12 hours ago
Kelli Combs (admin) commented on Kelli Combs (admin)'s group Eclipse Scopist (Send work request)
12 hours ago
Harman Singh commented on Janet's page Proofreaders
21 hours ago
Harman Singh updated their profile
21 hours ago
Angie Ploch posted a blog post

© 2022   Created by Kelli Combs (admin).   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service