In House Counsel Depositions: p Navigating Complex Legal and - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Presenting a live 90‐minute webinar with interactive Q&A

In‐House Counsel Depositions: p Navigating Complex Legal and Ethical Issues

Responding to Deposition Notices and Subpoenas and Protecting Privileged Information

T d ’ f l f

1pm Eastern | 12pm Central | 11am Mountain | 10am Pacific THURS DAY, JANUARY 17, 2013

Today’s faculty features:

David B. Fawcett, Partner, Reed Smith, Pittsburgh Matthew R. S heldon, Partner, Reed Smith, Falls Church, Va.

The audio portion of the conference may be accessed via the telephone or by using your computer's

• speakers. Please refer to the instructions emailed to registrants for additional information. If you

have any questions, please contact Customer Service at 1-800-926-7926 ext. 10.

Tips for Optimal Quality

S d Q lit S

• und Quality

If you are listening via your computer speakers, please note that the quality of your sound will vary depending on the speed and quality of your internet connection. If the sound quality is not satisfactory and you are listening via your computer speakers, you may listen via the phone: dial 1-866-328-9525 and enter your PIN when prompted Otherwise please send us a chat or e mail when prompted. Otherwise, please send us a chat or e-mail sound@ straffordpub.com immediately so we can address the problem. If you dialed in and have any difficulties during the call, press *0 for assistance.

Viewing Qualit y

To maximize your screen, press the F11 key on your keyboard. To exit full screen, press the F11 key again press the F11 key again.

Continuing Education Credits

FOR LIVE EVENT ONLY

For CLE purposes, please let us know how many people are listening at your location by completing each of the following steps:

• In the chat box, type (1) your company name and (2) the number of

attendees at your location attendees at your location

• Click the word balloon button to send

In-House Counsel Depositions: Navigating Complex Legal and Ethical Issues

A Strafford Webinar Presented By: D id F tt R d S ith LLP David Fawcett, Reed Smith LLP Matt Sheldon, Reed Smith LLP January 17, 2013

Question: How often do you worry about being Question: How often do you worry about being deposed?

A Once a day

• A. Once a day.
• B. Once a week.
• C. Once a month.
• D. Rarely.

y

• E. Never.

F So often it keeps me up at night

• F. So often it keeps me up at night.

5

Q ti Wh t i fid l l ith t t Question: What is your confidence level with respect to understanding the rules and strategies of being deposed?

• A. Very high.
• B. High.
• B. High.
• C. Moderate.

D L

• D. Low.
• E. Very low.

6

Overview

• General rules regarding depositions of in
• General rules regarding depositions of in-

house counsel.

• Responding to deposition notices and
• Responding to deposition notices and

subpoenas. I h l d iti d i il

• In-house counsel depositions and privilege

issues. Q ti ?

• Questions?

7

In-House Counsel Depositions

• Basic Deposition Rules
• Basic Deposition Rules
• Preparing for the Deposition
• Issues During the Deposition
• Responding to the Deposition Notice or

p g p Subpoena

8

Deposition Ground Rules

• Preparing the witness is the key.

p g y

• Notice/subpoena must be proper.
• Be cooperative but push back if necessary.
• Familiarize yourself with local practice.

9

Preparing for the Deposition

• What questions are likely to be

asked?

• What other areas of inquiry might

the questioner delve into?

• What are the areas where answers

will be permitted?

• What are the areas where an

instruction not to answer will likely be given?

10

Issues Relating to Deposition Preparation

• Document Review
• Review documents that refresh the witness’s recollection or that

the witness will likely rely on in her testimony.

• Draw Clear Lines on Privilege/Work Product

Draw Clear Lines on Privilege/Work Product

• Waiving privilege as to particular documents or discussions may

inadvertently waive the privilege on the subject matter generally.

• Conversely making subjects off-limits in depositions can make

Conversely, making subjects off limits in depositions can make them off-limits at trial (e.g. an advice of counsel defense).

• Understand the Risks and Rules Going In
• In-house counsel: discuss strategy in advance but remember that
• In-house counsel: discuss strategy in advance but remember that

you are the witness and not the lawyer at the deposition!

11

During the deposition

• Instructions Not to Answer:

Instructions Not to Answer:

• May Be Risky.
• May Be Necessary.
• Be Prepared Going In, But Don’t Be Afraid to Confer on

Privilege Issues During the Deposition.

• Be Prepared to Seek Immediate Court Intervention.
• In-house counsel:
• Focus on Being the Witness − Not the Lawyer.

/Off

• Understand What is at Issue Versus What is Privileged/Off-

Limits and Provide Outside Counsel the Factual Foundation to Object.

12

Hypothetical

• During litigation opposing counsel serves
• During litigation, opposing counsel serves

interrogatories.

• In house counsel verifies the interrogatory
• In-house counsel verifies the interrogatory

answers. C i h l b ti d?

• Can in-house counsel be questioned?

13

Hypothetical 2

• In house counsel verifies interrogatory
• In-house counsel verifies interrogatory

answers that inadvertently contain a factual mistake regarding the company’s principal g g p y p p place of business.

• In-house counsel, in response to a motion to

In house counsel, in response to a motion to dismiss, signs an affidavit stating that the interrogatory answer was incorrect and then provides an accurate statement of facts.

• Can in-house counsel be questioned?

q

14

Hypothetical 3

• In house counsel authorizes the hiring of a
• In-house counsel authorizes the hiring of a

private investigator.

• The PI improperly/unlawfully records phone
• The PI improperly/unlawfully records phone

conversations. C i h l b ti d?

• Can in-house counsel be questioned?

15

Hypothetical 4

• You are defending the deposition of in house
• You are defending the deposition of in-house
• counsel. In response to a question that

arguably seeks privileged information, in- g y p g , house counsel says “I need to confer with my counsel before answering that question.” Opposing counsel objects and demands an answer to the question.

• What do you do?

16

Responding to the Deposition Notice g

• r Subpoena
• Is the noticed deponent aware of facts that are

legitimate subjects of discovery? legitimate subjects of discovery?

• Has the company put the advice of counsel at issue?
• Has counsel been noticed to harass or for other

improper purposes? improper purposes?

• Is the notice procedurally proper?
• Does the notice satisfy rule requirements?
• Was service proper?
• Was service proper?
• If the corporation is not a party:
• Does a subpoena accompany the notice?
• Does the issuing court have jurisdiction?
• Does the issuing court have jurisdiction?
• Did the serving party obtain the proper

commissions?

17

Challenging a Deposition Notice/Subpoena

• Challenging a deposition notice/subpoena may be

the best alternative if: t e best a te at e

• Defect in notice/subpoena is clear.
• Noticed party has no non-privileged

information.

• The serving party is being unreasonable
• The serving party is being unreasonable.
• The serving party’s motives are questionable.
• You can obtain leverage re: scope, length of

deposition.

• You can afford the expense of challenging.
• Options for challenging include:
• Negotiating with opposing counsel
• Negotiating with opposing counsel.
• Moving for a protective order.
• Serving objections and then forcing a motion to

compel.

• Note: Failing to file or serve a written response

can be risky.

18

But Compliance May Be the Best Option If . . .

• The requested discovery is legitimate.

The requested discovery is legitimate.

• You want to use counsel as a witness.
• Any defect is debatable or just technical in nature.
• Supplying a deponent is the best way of creating a record that

there is no legitimately discoverable information.

• You want to avoid incurring fees associated with a challenge
• You want to avoid incurring fees associated with a challenge.
• Your opponent will agree to limits or restrictions as favorable

as the court or discovery master will likely grant.

19

Hypothetical

• Opposing counsel has been difficult to deal with. During discovery, he notices

pp g g y the deposition of your client’s General Counsel, who has had very little involvement in the case. Opposing counsel never conferred with you prior to noticing the deposition and the deposition is scheduled at a time and place extremely inconvenient for you and the witness. y y

• What do you do?
• A. Serve objections and wait to see what happens.
• B. Immediately file a motion for a protective order.
• C. Call opposing counsel and tell him he’s a jerk.
• D. Comply with the notice so as not to cause a stir.

20

Other Tactical Responses

• Objecting: even if you decide to comply with a deposition

Objecting: even if you decide to comply with a deposition notice, consider serving objections in advance to:

• Demarcate privileged or work product areas that will be off-

limits to spur up-front agreements or strengthen later limits to spur up front agreements or strengthen later defenses.

• In the case of a corporate notice, object to overbroad or

ambiguous topics ambiguous topics.

• Reciprocating:
• If you have legitimate grounds for deposing your opponent’s

counsel, noticing their depositions can often lead to more productive negotiations and/or better behavior during depositions.

21

Local Practice

• Despite federal and state rules each court
• Despite federal and state rules, each court

may handle depositions differently.

• Local rules can impact deposition location
• Local rules can impact deposition location

and the proper way to assert objections. F ili i lf ith th j d ( d

• Familiarize yourself with the judges (e.g. do

they frown upon calling the court when a dispute arises during the deposition and dispute arises during the deposition and prefer that disputes be handled post- deposition?). p )

22

Hypothetical

• You are defending the deposition of in-house counsel. Opposing

g p pp g counsel is being very aggressive, argumentative, and demanding that the witness discuss matters you consider to be privileged. At one point, opposing counsel threatens to call the judge after you instruct the witness not to answer the witness not to answer.

• What do you do?
• A. Hand him the phone.
• B. Articulate clearly on the record the basis for your objection

and tell opposing counsel you will seek an immediate protective

• rder if he continues this line of questioning.

C I di t l dj th d iti

• C. Immediately adjourn the deposition.
• D. Ask for a short recess to discuss the matter with opposing

counsel to try to reach a resolution.

23

Let’s Talk . . . Attorney-Client Privilege

• The Rule: applies to communications

made in confidence between a client made in confidence between a client and his or her attorney for the purpose

• f obtaining legal advice.
• Assume nothing is privileged, then ask:
• Is it a communication that fits the

definition? D ti l ?

• Does an exception apply?
• Have we done everything we can to

prevent a waiver?

• Are there foreign law implications?
• Are there foreign law implications?

24

Work Product Doctrine

• Two kinds: Fact and Opinion.

Two kinds: Fact and Opinion.

• Protection includes work of “agents.” (Rule

26)

• Key Test: “Anticipation of Litigation.”
• Problem of “Ordinary Course of Business.”

y

• Law Department as First Responder.

25

Common Privilege Problems In g Depositions

• Facts v. Legal Advice

Facts v. Legal Advice

• Business Advice v. Legal Advice.
• Employee conversations in the presence of counsel – “The

Zone of Secrecy.”

• Conversations with outside parties relating to legal matters.

Are they protected?

26

The Facts and Nothing But the Facts . . .

• Communications relating to legal
• Communications relating to legal

advice are privileged.

• Facts are not
• Facts are not.
• Separating the two can be tricky.

27

Hypothetical

• In house counsel is asked in a deposition:
• In-house counsel is asked in a deposition:

“What did you discuss with the CEO about

• Mr. Doe’s termination?”
• Privileged?

I h l i th k d “W th

• In-house counsel is then asked: “Was the

CEO concerned about the consequences of terminating Mr Doe?” terminating Mr. Doe?

• Privileged?

28

Hypothetical 2

• In litigation involving a dispute over the

In litigation involving a dispute over the interpretation of a contract, in-house counsel for one

• f the parties is deposed and during the deposition

i k d h t h b li th i f “ t fit” is asked what he believes the meaning of “net profit” is in the contract. The interpretation of “net profit” was the subject of extensive discussion between in- house counsel and management prior to and during the litigation. Sh ld i h l th ti

• Should in-house counsel answer the question or

invoke the privilege?

29

Hypothetical 3

• Same scenario

In house counsel answers

• Same scenario. In-house counsel answers

the question and tells the questioner his interpretation of “net profit.” Questioner then p p Q asks in-house counsel the basis of his

• interpretation. Counsel defending the

deposition objects and instructs in-house counsel not to answer on the grounds of privilege and work product protection The privilege and work product protection. The questioner threatens to call the judge. Wh i i ht?

• Who is right?

30

It’s Just Business

• Business Advice v. Legal Advice

g

• Wearing two hats.
• Commingled communications.

“P d i t P ” d “B f” T t

• “Predominant Purpose” and “Because of” Tests.
• Common 3-part analysis:
• Could a non-lawyer perform a given task?
• For what purpose was the lawyer contacted?
• Did either the client or lawyer acknowledge the nature of the

lawyer’s role?

31

The “Privileged” Life of In-House Counsel.

• So what does Jane do?
• Gathers facts.
• E-mails client.

P d t

• Prepares documents.
• Alludes to no legal principle

and conducts no legal analysis

• Meet Jane Doe:
• Senior Vice President/Deputy

G l C l t fi i l analysis.

• Makes recommendation.
• Jane’s company declines to

General Counsel at a financial institution.

• Experienced lawyer, highly

honor the LOC.

• If Jane is deposed, are her

recommendations privileged? p y , g y placed in law department.

• One day her phone rings. She is

asked: should her company honor asked: should her company honor an existing Letter of Credit?

32

Scenario: While negotiating a contract, in-house counsel provides advice to the client as to

• bligations and risks under the contract and
• bligations and risks under the contract and

whether to proceed to closing. Counsel does not cite case law, but counsel’s opinion is based on her understanding of applicable state/federal laws. Question: If in-house counsel is asked during deposition about her advice, should she answer?

33

Investigations

• Fact gathering
• Fact-gathering.
• In-house counsel’s role.
• Communications with management about

the investigation.

• Compliance issues.

34

Hypothetical

• In house counsel is asked to investigate
• In-house counsel is asked to investigate

employee claims of discrimination.

• In house counsel interviews several
• In-house counsel interviews several

employees to obtain information pertinent to the investigation. the investigation.

• In-house counsel is later asked in a

deposition about her conversations with the deposition about her conversations with the employees.

• Should she answer?
• Should she answer?

35

The “Zone of Secrecy” y

• There is a persistent belief among non-

There is a persistent belief among non lawyer employees that copying in-house counsel on communications will result in privilege protection.

• Results in a dilution of the privilege that can

have significant adverse consequences.

36

Hypothetical

• During a meeting the CFO informs the CEO
• During a meeting, the CFO informs the CEO,

in the presence of in-house counsel, about an accounting issue, and states “I hope this g , p doesn’t get us sued.” Counsel is not asked for his advice during the meeting. In subsequent litigation over the accounting issue, in-house counsel is asked about the conversation during his deposition conversation during his deposition.

• Is the communication between the CFO and

CEO i il d? CEO privileged?

37

Hypothetical (Part 2)

• Same scenario as before
• Same scenario as before.
• CEO responds to CFO and says “Who cares

if we get sued? We’re hiring Reed Smith if we get sued? We re hiring Reed Smith. They win all of their cases! I for one am going to sleep soundly tonight. Want to go going to sleep soundly tonight. Want to go golfing tomorrow?”

• Privileged?

Privileged?

38

Outside Parties

• Sharing privileged information with outside consultants may result in

waiver of privilege.

• The “interpreter” standard: communications with a financial advisor

p are covered by the attorney-client privilege if the financial advisor’s role is limited to helping a lawyer give effective advice by explaining financial concepts to the lawyer. U.S. v. Kovel, 296 F.2d 918 (2d Cir. 1961). Th “f i l i l ” d i d h li

• The “functional equivalent” doctrine: extends the attorney-client

privilege to communications between a corporation’s counsel and corporate consultants who are de facto employees. F.T.C. v. GlaxoSmithKline, 294 F.3d 141 (D.C. Cir. 2002).

• Disclosures to outside auditors:
• work product protection can extend to auditor-created documents

prepared in course of determining appropriate litigation reserves.

• consistent with “agency” approach in Rule 26. Focus is on content

consistent with agency approach in Rule 26. Focus is on content and the purpose behind creating the document.

39

Hypothetical

• In-house counsel shares privileged communications

In house counsel shares privileged communications with outside financial advisor.

• Claims “functional equivalence.”

q

• Intense restructuring negotiations – consultant

spends 90% of time on negotiations with bank/creditors.

• Consultant at the table with in-house counsel.
• In-house counsel is deposed.
• Communications protected by the privilege?

40

Hypothetical 2

• There is a large explosion at a company factory and

There is a large explosion at a company factory and three workers are severely injured. The event generates lots of media attention and there is likely i t b f ll liti ti i t th going to be follow-on litigation against the company. In-house counsel wants to get ahead of any negative publicity and retains a PR firm to consult the company on its response. In-house counsel wants to discuss the litigation risks with the PR firm but is concerned that she may waive any privilege but is concerned that she may waive any privilege by doing so.

• What should in-house counsel do?

41

Conclusion

• In-house counsel depositions create risks but are often

In house counsel depositions create risks but are often inevitable.

• Solid preparation of the witness before the deposition is

critical critical.

• Counsel must establish early on the parameters of the

deposition through objections, a protective order, or otherwise.

• Understand and recognize any privilege issues that may come

up so you can avoid a waiver.

42

Questions? Who To Contact:

• David Fawcett
• David Fawcett
• dfawcett@reedsmith.com

412 288 4188

• 412-288-4188
• Matt Sheldon
• msheldon@reedsmith.com
• 703-641-4334

43