CSRNation

Welcome to CSR Nation

Identifying Exhibits

Hello, everyone! I just for some reason am having a problem remembering the exact procedure for identifying exhibits. Is it when the exhibit is first mentioned (i.e., I'll have this marked as Exhibit Number 1) or is it when they actually talk about what the exhibit is? I appreciate all of the help!!!

Add a Comment

You need to be a member of CSRNation to add comments!

Join CSRNation

Comment by Rhoda Collins on March 20, 2009 at 11:51: We don't take ours either, Brenda.....I know some in Buffalo do as Buffalo attys that are over in Rochester for the day look at me like I had four heads when I say I don't take them w/me, lol. (I just ate a whole 'small' bag of red licorice while reading this, lol.)

Comment by Erica Abbott on March 20, 2009 at 11:10: I like that attitude. We don't ever get to take the documents with us. And I've had trouble with getting spellings lately because they want everything marked by their bates stamps. Well, then I have nothing to go by for names or anything. Then the witnesses are always running out of the room along with the attorneys because who wants to be there after an all day depo if you don't do it for a living. If I do catch them, they never know they answers. lol. It has been a TOUGH week in that department. (Even though it has nothing to do with "marking" the exhibits. lmao)

Comment by Brenda Rogers on March 20, 2009 at 7:22: Oh! "Mark" of course means us physically marking it, but I also use it referring to the mark I make in the exhibit. You're far more precise than what happens around here sometimes. There are times attys will hand exhibits to the witness, "Have you seen this?" "No." It's put aside, but it's never actually verbally identified. However, that's is where it would show up in my index.

You guys don't take the exhibits with you, do you? Or is that another place back East? I get the description from the exhibit that I have taken with me. If you don't have it and can't discern what it is, I'd just put "Document." They have the exhibit; they can look it up. You can only do what you can do!

Comment by Erica Abbott on March 20, 2009 at 6:35: I just want to jump in here and reiterate the word "identify". Here in NY we mark exhibits wherever the attorney says to mark it or hands it to us to mark. Then when they mention the exhibit and actually start talking about it, we put in a code to identify it. Therefore, you've got two things going on; marking and identifying. I know where to mark all of my exhibits, I was just curious about the identifying. Seems how he said, "We'll mark this Number 8" or something like that; I, of course, would mark it there. But because he wasn't actually saying what Exhibit 8 is and didn't actually talk about it until later, I was unsure which spot to identify the exhibit; that spot where I marked it or the spot where he actually talked about it (and identified what it was) later.

Sorry for all the confusion, but thanks for all the help!!

Comment by Brenda Rogers on March 18, 2009 at 11:04: Sometimes you just write and figure with the Internet and forums, you'll get whatever may sound funny at first. Sometimes you don't know what you don't know. Also, so many times, what sounds funny or odd or unfamiliar at first becomes clear after another phrase or sentence. I usually don't speak up unless something flies by me and it sounds like gobbledygook and I can't even make a stab at the phonetics. Usually, it's a common word or phrase that I just didn't hear right. If I feel certain I have the phonetics, I figure that's what research is for. Research is definitely a part of this job.

I have called to confirm doctors' names that I plain and simply couldn't find. I've never called for something like "Borg." If I were totally stuck, I would. Calling law offices for something like that feels like I didn't do my job right.

Also, you REALLY need to know your audience. I called a good, friendly client for a word/name/something because he wanted the tript that day and his assistant was out. He gave me a dressing-down for not asking at the time of deposition. At the time of deposition, I didn't know that I didn't know. Ya know?

I think the way we're trained doesn't lend to calling law firms. School left me with the impression that contacting the atty for something like this wasn't the thing to do. Now, I don't agree with that, but that's where the psychology or philosophy started for me.

Comment by Rhoda Collins on March 18, 2009 at 9:18: I have called. I ask a lot, lol. I know for me it was when I was newest and really not 'knowing' what I needed to ask on until I got home and was done sweating it out, lol!!!! I think experience helps us to slow them down or to ask. Patience is a virtue and a sense of humor too, I think is necessary. Grumpy will not get you anywhere w/this job.

Comment by Brenda Rogers on March 17, 2009 at 17:13: Reluctance to call them regarding? I may be missing something here.

Comment by Rhoda Collins on March 17, 2009 at 10:16: that instructor's answer is the only one. They can't cover all the variables. That's where students should be finding CRs and mentoring. Take initiative! Call places, go sit in. I'm a hairdresser also and all we learned in school was useless, lol. We learned on the job. Same thing.

Comment by Brenda Rogers on March 17, 2009 at 8:41: I skimmed your last paragraph and didn't catch it all.

When the situation first came up for me, I had no one to talk to. I was taught in school to mark EXACTLY where it was marked. There was no discussion of things marked at the beginning of the depo or premarked. They stressed the importance of WHEN they were marked.

Only thing I can figure, looking back, is the teacher, who had worked in one state for 5 yrs total, hadn't run into this situation. There are so many variables in this job, sometimes we just need to be creative. A lot of times.

Comment by Brenda Rogers on March 17, 2009 at 7:35: It certainly seems like less of a headache than tracking when someone mentions it during the dep, it accurately reflects the timing of the occurrence and it wouldn’t potentially add several unnecessary pages to the transcript.

Less of a headache for the reporter/scopist, but when the atty or paralegal wants to find where a particular exhibit is discussed in the deposition, then what? All the premarked exhibits showing in one place doesn't help. It reflects the timing of the marking, but that isn't what is important. That is done as a matter of expediency.

As the transcript is being scoped, it is a simple matter of reading in the "Exhibit marked" blurb when the exhibit is introduced, if the reporter didn't do it at the time.

Transcripts are supposed to be helpful. Indexes are supposed to be helpful. Not being able to find where exhibits are discussed by a quick glance at the index isn't helpful.

Certainly not advising scopists to do something different from what their reporters want; just explaining the logic of reflecting in the index where the exhibits are discussed.