Hall v clifton precision

Clifton Precision - as (.rtf), PDF File (.pdf), Text File (.txt) or read online for free. The way that courts have most frequently analyzed this issue is illustrated by the competing views set forth in two leading cases on the subject: Hall v. In Re Stratosphere Corporation, 1F. Litigation is, by its very nature, adversarial.

Members of the Pennsylvania Bar.

Well, the grand-daddy of all cases on this question is from right here in our back yard in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, called Hall v.

Geisinger Medical Center, 210 .

Stuart, Rambo Bites the Dust: Current Trends in Deposition Ethics, J. Cary, Rambo Depositions: Controlling an . Our analysis begins with Hall v. Gawthrop of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. This Note is dedicated to my parents for their endless support and encouragement. All errors contained herein are mine and mine alone. Darby Dickerson, The Law and Ethics of Civil Depositions, MD.

It remained an order applicable only to the litigation in.

Hall, and therefore might have remained an interesting anomaly. Not surprisingly, the authorities are somewhat mixed. Although Hall is unreported (a copy is available here), consider the hundreds of cases . One of the seminal cases on the issue is Hall v. This preparation may include discussion concerning the application of law to the events in issue.

One seminal and oft-cited case on the subject is Hall v. The leading case for the “no consultation” rule is Hall v. Coaching the witness during deposition not prohibited. In the discovery mode questions are asked with the aim of finding out infor- mation. Another purpose is to even the playing field somewhat by allowing all parties access . Attorney Steinberg provided opposing counsel with the case Plaisted v. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania decided what would become the seminal case for the prohibition of lawyers conferring with witnesses during . FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH ANY THE FOREGOING MAY RESULT IN SANCTIONS.