Which statement will be considered true/genuine

[Nellibelle]

What is legally possible to do is not always the legally smartest thing to do. There can be ramifications to changing your responses in a deposition. Until you understand this, your continued guesses (especially as to what most attorneys will recommend) can harm a poster.

For an example, take a look at 18 USC ��1621 and 1623. Two or more contradictory statements made under oath is perjury. See: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1621 and http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1623

Changes in deposition answers can be used to impeach testimony.

A jury may be provided the original answers given in a deposition as well as the changes that have been made to the answers. They could consider both and credibility can be called into question.

I can go on.

In other words, and seriously Nellibelle, knock it off. I think all of us are getting tired of entertaining you and your postings.

As you should know, there may be good reasons to correct one's transcript from a deposition. It is a fact that not all stenographers get everything right when they type what they hear. Also, as I said earlier, some testimony may have been found to be vague upon review and therefore, for the benefit of all parties, should be clarified.

All I said was that the person deposed usually gets the option of reviewing a transcribed document and making changes if necessary. This is not an opinion, this is a fact in most if not all states! Whether one's Attorney recommends it or not, is irrelevant. Apparently, the Op was unrepresented at his/her deposition, because there is no mention of getting an option of reviewing and making corrections to his/her testimony.

There was no guessing on my part, my post was based on my experience. And, according to what you said in your post, Latigo, regarding an 'errata sheet', which does indeed allow one to make changes to testimony, my post was accurate and you'd have to agree or be contradictory.

And, Quincy? I'm a she not a he!

 

[quincy]

As you should know, there may be good reasons to correct one's transcript from a deposition. It is a fact that not all stenographers get everything right when they type what they hear. Also, as I said earlier, some testimony may have been found to be vague upon review and therefore, for the benefit of all parties, should be clarified.

All I said was that the person deposed usually gets the option of reviewing a transcribed document and making changes if necessary. This is not an opinion, this is a fact in most if not all states! Whether one's Attorney recommends it or not, is irrelevant. Apparently, the Op was unrepresented at his/her deposition, because there is no mention of getting an option of reviewing and making corrections to his/her testimony.

There was no guessing on my part, my post was based on my experience. And, according to what you said in your post, Latigo, regarding an 'errata sheet', which does indeed allow one to make changes to testimony, my post was accurate and you'd have to agree or be contradictory.

And, Quincy? I'm a she not a he!

As you should know, if you want to post legal accuracies, there are good reasons why one shouldn't correct one's transcripts from a deposition.

Here is an additional link, this time to the article, "Rewriting the Record: A Federal Court Split on the Scope of Permissible Changes to a Deposition Transcript," written by Christopher Macchiaroli and Danielle Tarin and published in The Federal Courts Law Review, Volume 3, Issue 1, 2009: http://www.fclr.org/fclr/articles/html/2008/fedctslrev3.pdf

And here is yet another link to an article that outlines risks to making changes in deposition testimony, titled, "But Wait! There's More! Can a Witness Make Substantive Changes to His Deposition Testimony After the Fact?" written by Andrea T. Vavonese of Akin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer & Feld, LLP: http://cdn.akingump.com/images/content/4/8/v4/4816/ButWaitTheresMoreAndreaTVavonese.pdf

An attorney and/or the deponent must weigh carefully whether substantive changes to deposition testimony will ultimately be less convincing to the court than the original testimony, original testimony of which remains a part of the record and has been, can be, and is used in court.

Finally, Nellibelle, it is NEVER "irrelevant" what a poster's attorney recommends. It is exactly what a poster's attorney says and recommends that a poster to this site NEEDS to trust and rely on.

 

[nancypowell]

Appreciate again for the valuable information.

Additional information: I still have time to make corrections/changes.

I live in New York but the deposition was in relation to a lawsuit in Florida (my deposition also took place in Florida) and I apologize for not including this information in the past (I thought my state of residence, NY, is enough).

I got a sheet/table that contains the following four columns:
"Page, Line, Change, Reason"

to make any changes. At the bottom of the sheet/table, it states "Under penalties of perjury, I declare that I have read my deposition and that is true and correct subject to any changes in form or substance entered here"

Could you advise me if it is better for me to make the change or let it leave it as it is?

 

[Zigner]

Appreciate again for the valuable information.

Additional information: I still have time to make corrections/changes.

I live in New York but the deposition was in relation to a lawsuit in Florida (my deposition also took place in Florida) and I apologize for not including this information in the past (I thought my state of residence, NY, is enough).

I got a sheet/table that contains the following four columns:
"Page, Line, Change, Reason"

to make any changes. At the bottom of the sheet/table, it states "Under penalties of perjury, I declare that I have read my deposition and that is true and correct subject to any changes in form or substance entered here"

Could you advise me if it is better for me to make the change or let it leave it as it is?

That is not something we can answer. You should consult with an attorney. (Your question is specific enough so as to be outside the scope of this forum.)

 

[quincy]

Appreciate again for the valuable information.

Additional information: I still have time to make corrections/changes.

I live in New York but the deposition was in relation to a lawsuit in Florida (my deposition also took place in Florida) and I apologize for not including this information in the past (I thought my state of residence, NY, is enough).

I got a sheet/table that contains the following four columns:
"Page, Line, Change, Reason"

to make any changes. At the bottom of the sheet/table, it states "Under penalties of perjury, I declare that I have read my deposition and that is true and correct subject to any changes in form or substance entered here"

Could you advise me if it is better for me to make the change or let it leave it as it is?

You requested a review of the transcript during the deposition then? Interesting.

No one here can advise you as to whether to make changes to the deposition transcript or not. That is outside the scope of this forum. For that type of assistance, you will need to consult an attorney either in your area or, if the lawsuit is out of Florida, an attorney in Florida. A personal review of the transcript, and the facts of the case you are involved in, will be necessary.

In the meantime, you can re-read what has been provided you in this thread (with the understanding that most of what has been provided centers on New York law) and you can read through the information found in the links provided. I believe at least two of the links have some information on Florida that you could find helpful.

This can give you a better understanding of the pros and cons of making corrections to a deposition transcript. These should be weighed carefully before making changes to your sworn deposition testimony.

Good luck - and my apologies for the unpleasant detour your thread took.