In January of this year, the State of California began instituting Assembly Bill 1875 (CCP Section 2025.290), limiting civil depositions to seven hours. Thankfully, California reporters don’t have to worry that attorneys will try to squeeze ten hours of testimony into seven, as the rule states that, “The court shall allow additional time, beyond any limits imposed by this section, if needed to fairly examine the deponent.” As legal professionals navigate these new limitations, effective deposition scheduling strategies for lawyers will become increasingly crucial. By prioritizing key topics and utilizing technology for better time management, attorneys can ensure that they maximize the value of their deposition time. Adapting to these changes will not only streamline the process but also enhance the overall quality of testimonies gathered.
There are six exceptions to this rule, including:
- employment-related matters,
- complex litigation,
- expert witnesses,
- stipulation among counsel,
- corporate designees, and
- possible expiration of the witness.
This makes the rule generally equivalent to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP) Rule 30, which also allows for time extensions based on fairness and other factors such as those enumerated above.
To aid reporters in complying with this rule, the California Court Reporters Board (CRB) posted a well-authored Q & A of “Frequently Asked Questions,” which begins by letting California’s reporters know that they are not legally required to be the “timekeeper.” However, California’s reporters should be aware that Stenograph’s Case Catalyst has what was originally referred to as a “Texas Timer” (created over 14 years ago when Texas implemented its 6-hour rule) to track examination time. Eclipse also has a timekeeping tool for its software users.
The difference between Texas’ 6-hour rule and California’s 7-hour rule is that Texas allots six hours per party to examine the witness, while California’s rule asks that all counsel together spend no more than seven hours examining a witness. For California’s lawyers, this means they must find ways to discover the information they seek before going on record, stipulate to a time extension, seek an order of the court to extend the time, or work together to divide the deposition time fairly and equitably. Scheduling depositions for legal cases can be challenging, especially when time restrictions are in place. Lawyers must strategize to maximize the effectiveness of their questioning within the allotted hours, which might include prioritizing key witness testimonies. Additionally, they can explore alternative dispute resolution options to effectively manage their cases without excessive time constraints.
Assembly Bill 1875 was passed in an effort to reduce litigation costs, and whether it succeeds in accomplishing that goal remains to be seen. What it may inadvertently achieve, however, is a renewed civility between plaintiff and defense counsel as they work to divide the time appropriately between all parties. Effective communication and collaboration are essential components to any case’s outcome. By emphasizing deposition strategies for successful trials, legal teams can foster a more productive atmosphere that benefits both sides. This cooperative approach may lead to improved resolutions and ultimately a decrease in the frequency of litigation.
