A deposition is by far the most important stage in any medical malpractice litigation because it gives all the parties the opportunity to discover the evidence presented by the opposing party.
Additionally, a deposition gives the conflicting parties a chance to resolve their disputes and waive the trial process. During a deposition, the plaintiff and the defendant may reach an agreement where the plaintiff decides to drop the charges or the defendant agrees to make a settlement.
Basically, there are many different ways of carrying out a deposition, which are mainly dictated by various factors such as geographical distance. It would be very inconvenient for an expert witness in a foreign country to fly in multiple times to attend deposition proceedings.
To best determine the most suitable way to conduct a deposition hearing, this article will explain the four types of depositions. Additionally, we will look at different scenarios in which every type of deposition is suitable.
Written Deposition
As the name suggests, a written deposition is conducted by asking questions that are written on paper prior to and during the deposition proceedings.
How exactly do these written questions work in a deposition?
A deposition proceeding is primarily conducted in the presence of a court reporter.
The court reporter essentially direct your medical malpractice lawyer Michigan and the opposing attorney to present their written questions to him. Afterward, the court reporter reads the questions aloud to the witness, who will answer verbally as the reporter notes down the response.
However, there is a notable downside to using written deposition as a basis for making arguments during trial. First, the defendant’s attorney is unable to directly assess the body language and test to the credibility of the witness’s testimony.
Furthermore, the witness is subject to leading by the attorney; leading the testimony of a witness makes it inadmissible in court.
A written testimony, on the other hand, is very resourceful as method of deposing a crucial witness who is serving time behind bars or obtaining the testimony of a key witness living outside the country.
Physical/In-person Deposition
A deposition involves all the parties of interest in the medical malpractice lawsuits. Such parties include; the plaintiff making the claim, defendant, expert witnesses, and the attorneys from both conflicting parties.
An in-person deposition requires all the parties listed above to be present in one room, usually a courtroom.
Additionally, the deposition session is presided over by a court reporter, who administers oaths and transcribes the details of the entire deposition.
In other words, the in-person deposition is very similar to an actual hearing in court, only that this time there is neither a judge nor a jury to oversee the proceedings.
In general, an in-person deposition is preferable because it gives your attorney a glimpse of how your expert witness will conduct himself in front of a judge. The possible loopholes in the witness’s testimony are discovered as the opposing council cross-examines him.
Virtual Depositions
Modern technology has advanced at a neck-breaking speed, giving rise to more efficient ways of conducting meetings. The benefits of modern technology have been extended into the justice world, where various proceedings, such as depositions, take place virtually.
What do we mean by virtual depositions?
A virtual deposition is a proceeding that does not necessarily require all the parties to be together in one room. As such, all involved parties communicate via interconnected devices, such as computers.
A virtual deposition allows your attorney and the opposing council to share evidence files and other exhibits in electronic formats, such as PDFs and MPEG pictures.
An ideal situation for a virtual deposition is where all the parties involved in the medical malpractice claim are far apart, or in areas with different time zones.
Hybrid Depositions
Hybrid depositions are similar to virtual depositions, only that in a hybrid deposition, one or two parties communicate via teleconference while the other parties are assembled in a courtroom or an office.
The main advantage of a hybrid deposition is that the opposing council (if they are on video) may fail to deliver a conclusive cross-examination, which weakens the defendants counter arguments later during trial.
Furthermore, a hybrid deposition proves to be convenient in a case where the witness is incarcerated.
Conclusion
All the types of deposition discussed have their benefits and usually work differently in various situations. As such, your medical malpractice lawyer should evaluate the most suitable method of deposition to recommend in order to ensure a speedy deposition.
Read More Blogs: How to Deal With Real Estate Agents When Buying