Devising Depositions: Readback’s Meet and Confer for March 2024

Indiana federal district court cites argument to liberally grant remote depositions.

There’s reason to believe that the ongoing debate over remote depositions isn’t much of a debate any longer. The Readback Blog has documented shifting perceptions on remote technology, stemming from cautious optimism at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic and evolving to the embrace of remote depositions as common practice reflective of a new post-pandemic normalcy. We’ve seen how remote depositions balance party interests and come to a practical, forward-thinking, common-sense approach to utilize legal technology to save costs and increase flexibility. January’s Devising Depositions post discussed a federal court’s determination that, contrary to conventional wisdom, parties may not be strictly entitled to in-person depositions. This month, we’ll look at yet another case that challenges the status quo and recognizes a path to remote depositions.

Court acknowledges technological advances, invokes federal rules of civil procedure to discuss remote depositions

In Hanwha Corporation v. Heartland Machine & Engineering (“Hanwha”), the District Court for the Southern District of Indiana cited a treatise on civil procedure stating that courts should liberally grant remote depositions. The reason? The court referenced improvements in remote technology, particularly with respect to audiovisual teleconferences, that address pre-pandemic concerns. 

The defendant in Hanwha, Heartland Machine & Engineering, LLC, had objected to a magistrate order allowing remote depositions. In its objection, the defendant argued that remote depositions would have a prejudicial impact and raised concerns over witness observation, witness coaching, interpretive services, and the contention that theirs was a document-heavy proceeding with a high amount in controversy. Finding that the magistrate judge’s order was not clearly erroneous, the court overruled the defendant’s objection to taking remote depositions, citing legal treatise and case law to reason that: 

“[T]he weight of authority suggests that ‘leave to take depositions by remote electronic means should be liberally granted.’ 7 Moore’s Federal Practice — Civil § 30.24 (2023). That position makes sense, especially in the context of videoconference depositions, because technology mitigates many of the concerns expressed by Heartland, including the use of documents. Dkt. 66 at 5-7 (collecting cases discussing how modern videoconferencing technology facilitates taking remote depositions). Technological advances have also mitigated other potentially problematic aspects of taking remote deposition, such as clear audio transmission and the use of interpreters.”

The court’s reasoning also included reference to objectives for cost and efficiency considerations that are stated in the very first rule of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure:

“Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(b)(4) authorizes courts to order that a deposition ‘be taken by telephone or other remote means.’ While Rule 30(b)(4) does not set forth a specific standard that courts must follow when evaluating a motion for remote depositions, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure are to be ‘construed, administered, and employed by the court and the parties to secure the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action and proceeding’ , Fed. R. Civ. P. 1.” 

Recognizing the value of remote depositions

Hanwha is yet another demonstration of the flexibility encompassed in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to accommodate remote depositions. As legal practice has become more familiar with legal technology, so too have courts expressed greater appreciation for the very rules that allow attorneys to use such technology for the better interests of their clients. Remote depositions are a game changer in litigation.

The next time you schedule a remote deposition, make sure to choose a service that understands the value and demonstrates the flexibility of meeting litigants where they are. Readback is a remote, non-stenographic deposition service that brings patented, state-of-the-art technology to remote depositions. Readback’s speech-to-text technology captures witness testimony while a team of human transcribers ensure a verbatim transcript. A human guardian remotely conducts the deposition experience to assist with exhibits and make sure that the proceeding runs smoothly. Readback’s flagship service, Active Reporting, offers premium remote deposition traits, providing rough drafts in one hour, certified transcripts in one day, and access to near-time text during the proceeding at flat rates. See what Readback has to offer. Visit Readback to join a live demonstration and schedule your next remote deposition today.

* Disclaimer:  Readback is neither a law firm nor a substitution for legal advice. This post should not be taken as legal opinion or advice.