The New Jersey Law Journal article, “A Matter of Strategy Now: Remote Depositions Are Becoming a Tactical Issue,” discusses the strategic aspect to the choice between in-person and remote depositions. Archer Business Litigation Group Partner Patrick Papalia was interviewed by NJ Law Journal’s Charles Toutant and discusses why he prefers to conduct in-person depositions throughout the article.
Patrick is quoted in the article stating, “I can tell you, in my experience, that when you’re confronting a witness, especially a witness where there’s critical testimony or controversial testimony, where it’s in dispute, that being in person presents opportunities that you wouldn’t have in remote [depositions]… There are attorneys out there that recognize the benefit of sheltering a key witness or a key party in their case from a deposition, the benefit of having it remote, and I’ve seen adversaries advocate for remote.” Patrick goes on to say that it is impossible to read witness’ body language, and they are more likely to engage in mischief during remote proceedings.
Patrick acknowledged his stance occasionally lands him at odds with opposing counsel. Plaintiff lawyers who work on contingency are more likely to opt for remote depositions, due to economic reasons.
To view the article, click here.