Kiser v. Boeing Co.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that a 30(b)(6) witness’s “testimony as a designee required him to provide information based on information reasonably available to Plaintiff”
• applying Fed.R.Evid. 612 through Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(b)(6) to require discovery of materials used to prepare a witness for deposition
• noting that the two first elements of Rule 612 may be established by either “direct proof (an admission by the deponent that review of the documents aided memory) or circumstantial proof, from which an inference may be drawn whether such assistance was received”
• “Recognizing the importance of documents in conducting effective deposition discovery, counsel frequently postpone, as was done in this case, deposition discovery until document production has taken place.”
• identifying the competing interests as (1) status of the witness; (2) nature of the issue in dispute; (3) when the events took place; (4) when the documents were reviewed; (5) number of documents reviewed; (6) whether the witness prepared the documents; (7
• work product materials are not beyond the scope of discovery on grounds of ''privilege”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).