Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Proper Objections at a Personal Injury Deposition
Historically, New York's Civil Practice Law & Rules (CPLR) ' 3115 has governed the process by which attorneys have objected to questions during an examination before trial. In 2006, however, 22 New York Codes, Rules and Regulations (NYCRR) ' 221.2 became effective and codified some of the objections that had arisen under the previous statute. Section 221.2 states that “[a] deponent shall answer all questions at a deposition, except (i) to preserve a privilege or right of confidentiality, (ii) to enforce a limitation set forth in an order of a court, or (iii) when the question is plainly improper and would, if answered, cause significant prejudice to any person. An attorney shall not direct a deponent not to answer except as provided in CPLR Rule 3115 or this subdivision.” An objection under Section 221.2 must be clearly stated by the witness' counsel in order to preserve it in case of appeal.
In a personal injury action there are four main categories of questions that an attorney can instruct his client not to answer. These categories are: 1) the palpably improper or irrelevant question; 2) privileged communications; 3) a defendant-physician's opinion of the co-defendant's alleged medical malpractice; and 4) the right against self-incrimination. See Palacino v. Brogno, 2013 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 6843, *7-9 (Sup. Ct., Orange Co. Oct. 22, 2013). The four categories reflect the well-settled “standard governing the appropriate scope of questioning at a deposition [which] is not based on admissibility at trial, but on whether the questioning relates to the controversy and will assist in trial preparation.” Hildebrandt v. Stephan, 42 Misc.3d 719, 724 (Sup. Ct., Erie Co. 2013).
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar Investigations
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
How AI Has Affected PR
When we consider how the use of AI affects legal PR and communications, we have to look at it as an industrywide global phenomenon. A recent online conference provided an overview of the latest AI trends in public relations, and specifically, the impact of AI on communications. Here are some of the key points and takeaways from several of the speakers, who provided current best practices, tips, concerns and case studies.
The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance Programs
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.