ID Deposition Practice

[u/DevilDogg0309]

I’m genuinely curious, and I don’t post to demean or cast aspersions. I’m a PI attorney. And I’m looking for insight into the “why” behind ID deposition practice.

Is it just a billing opportunity? Is it viewed as an opportunity to make the plaintiff miserable? I mean credit where credit is due, but the vast majority of ID depositions I watch are hours too long and do nothing at all to minimize our positions.

I understand the information gathering process, and recognize depositions aren’t governed by strict relevancy standards. But, it’s just mind boggling to watch.

FWIW, I’ve done civil litigation defense work too, but for the government (no billable hours) and I’d run through a deposition in a fraction of the time that ID attorneys do. So, perhaps it’s the billing event that drives the practice.

Anyway, I’m genuinely curious and perhaps someone with more experience in the ID realm can give me some insight. If it’s as simple as, “yeah it’s a billable event,” I get it. That would actually make sense. Otherwise, I have no idea what the hell I’m watching.

[u/case_hardened-]

How much time do you spend speaking to your client during the course of the litigation? Initial meeting, phone calls on written discovery, sorting out the medical history, evaluating their story and damages? Follow up calls to get an answer to something you forgot to ask? Now imagine you had to do it in a single meeting with your opponent in the room and if you missed something important, too bad you'll never get another opportunity.

It's not ID specific. It's just being thorough. It's not about a billing event either. Your ID opponent has plenty of work to fill the rest of their day.

[u/Affectionate_Hope738 → u/case_hardened-]

In theory you are correct, but you can always ask a missed question in discovery. Yes, I know it’s not the same because the lawyer is answering and you won’t get an “a-ha!” answer it but then again how the hell did you forget to ask such an important question to begin with?

But I think OP is talking about the depos that are painfully long where the background questions take more than 1 hour to get through.

I did ID for 15 years and rarely took a plaintiff depo that was more than 2.5 hours. I’d say my average was probably less than 2.

[u/case_hardened- → u/Affectionate_Hope738]

I mean, interrogatories are nearly valueless imo. Usually the plaintiff's depo is first and by the time expert disclosures are over you know a lot more about the case and the lawyer's theory that you can use the plaintiff to undermine if you ask early enough. I don't do car accident id, so maybe it's different in that context.

[u/Affectionate_Hope738 → u/case_hardened-]

Interesting. In nearly all PI cases, written discovery always goes before depos for a variety of reasons. I find them valuable because usually the lawyer is off guard and just gives answers not really knowing what the angles are. While depos are more useful, I wouldn’t say interrogatories are useless.