How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site. Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask Kimora Pope Your Own Question
Kimora Pope
Kimora Pope,
Category: California Employment Law
Satisfied Customers: 2700
Experience:  Attorney at Law Offices of Kimora Pope
105453597
Type Your California Employment Law Question Here...
Kimora Pope is online now
A new question is answered every 9 seconds

I have a novel situation. Federal Rule 28(a)(1)(A) allows

This answer was rated:

I have a novel situation. Federal Rule 28(a)(1)(A) allows "an officer authorized to administer oaths either by federal law or by the law in the place of examination" (or California in this case) as to the persons before whom depositions may be taken. California Code of Civil Procedure Section 2093(a) allows "every court, every judge, or clerk of any court, every justice, and every notary public, has the power to administer oaths affirmations."Federal Rule 28(a)(1)(B) is a secondary option which indicates a person appointed by the court to administer oaths and take testimony. The distinction between (A) and (B) is that (A) only indicates the administration of oaths and does not mention the taking of testimony.F.R.C.P. Rule 28(a)(2) gives the definition of "officer" as either someone appointed by the court or somebody designated by the party according to F.R.C.P. Rule 29(a). Rule 29(a) states "a deposition may be taken before any person, at any time or place, on any notice, and in the manner specified." F.R.C.P. Rule 30(a)(1) states “a party may, by oral questions, depose any person, including a party, without leave of court. F.R.C.P. Rule 30(b)(3)(A) states "testimony may be recorded by audio, audiovisual, or stenographic means. The noticing party bears the recording costs." F.R.C.P. Rule 30(b)(3)(B) indicates "any party may designate another method for recording the testimony in addition to that specified in the original notice."
So, it is quite clear federal law provides options as to who may take a deposition and the method used. It is also understood that if a "stenographer" is used, then, typically that would be a court reporter who would be certified and/or appointed by the court. However, the law does not require the exclusive use of a court reporter/stenographer.
My question, then, is if the defendant is sworn in by a notary...the deposition begins...the defendant's attorney outright starts voicing speaking objections...the deponent/witness still answers the question afterwards...defendant counsel abruptly takes a 20min unauthorized break in the lobby to coach the witness after only 11mins into the deposition...counsel comes back into the conference room w/o the deponent...demands to suspend the deposition on the grounds they feel a court reporter must be present to conduct the deposition...resists having the deponent come back into the room so we can officially go off record and, then, refuses from that point forward to allow the client to be deposed w/o unless an "authorized court reporter" is present, is that grounds for the plaintiff to file a MOTION FOR CONTEMPT in addition to SANCTIONS for the costs associated with the deposition?Thanks!

Hello. I am KimP. I have practiced law for over 25 years.

 

That is NOT reason to file for contempt since they may actually have a good reason for their actions.

You can file for contempt if they act this way again after you have provided whatever they are complaining about.

 

Best wishes. Please give me a 5 star rating. Thanks

Kimora Pope and 3 other California Employment Law Specialists are ready to help you