Subpoenaed. Legal advice por favor?

[Conundrum]

Just got my first subpoena. I'm not in trouble but someone I used to do some business with is. Do I redact all the profanity I used in the emails I'm printing or leave it for comic affect? Do they really need every email? Chances of being called to testified or maybe just deposition? The trial is in another state. I realize it's probably case specific...I'm trying to mentally prepare for what's next. I have to submit by the 14th. I'm not a fan of the defendant but I also don't have a dog in the fight at this point. Also not going to post any case details.

[DJSapp]

Redact nothing. Delete nothing that is within 4 degrees of separation of the person in question. Clear your internet history and any personal info from your machine ASAP including personal photos.

Talk to a lawyer ASAP. Getting tripped up in a deposition sucks ass and might have consequences, even worse if you're on the stand.

[MakersTeleMark]

Send your colleague a bunch of gay porn, then do your disclosures.

[MontuckyFried]

Talk to a lawyer ASAP.

This. This right here. Do not do a thing until then. I got subpoenaed and deposed not that long ago, also for something that was not my deal.

Thankfully, my lawyer saved me a TON of time and hassle by informing me of what was and wasn't ACTUALLY subject for me to reproduce for the plaintiff's attorney. So in the end, I didn't have that much information to cough up, and really didn't have much of substance at all. Didn't hurt or help anybody. I ended up being about as neutral of a party as possible, so I'm sure it was just a huge waste of the plaintiff's money in the end.

Another reason to talk to a lawyer is that they can help you if you're out of state. I was in Montana when I got deposed for a Texas case. He pretty much just proposed to the plaintiff's attorney that since I was out of state if we could do it over the phone from a local attorney's office, to which they agreed. I ended up not needing to do that since I was able to make it after all, but honestly in the end I learned that the deposition, while sometimes meant to be intimidating or get some dirt they need, wasn't a big deal at all. I just told the truth, which is always the easiest thing to do, answered the questions concisely and to the point. Booooooring is all it was. I think their attorney was super frustrated with me, but mine was proud of me. Lol. I hate getting somehow wrapped up in other people's problems. Especially when I actively try to avoid that sort of nonsense to begin with. The whole thing made me want to smack both parties upside the head!

[mtnjam]

You mean they finally found Jesse Jones? Let's talk soon.

[SumJongGuy]

No matter what they ask... Just respond with "NO COLLUSION!! NO COLLUSION!!!"..

[Dantheman]

This is a helpful training video

[east or bust]

^lol

[Danno]

I think you should only listen to the lawyers' advice, of which I only see one who has posted so far in this thread.

Send your colleague a bunch of gay porn, then do your disclosures.

Uh, nevermind.

[wyeaster]

You mean they finally found Jesse Jones? Let's talk soon.

hey that's the guy that got run out of here back in 2005-2006, right? regardless, whoever that guy was was another intro to tgr.

[smartyiak]

You can't have a deposition thread without:

[old goat]

Getting your own attorney is not cheap but unless you are absolutely certain that you have no legal exposure of course you have no choice. I've given depositions and testified without the advice of an attorney in a number of cases as the treating physician when someone was on trial for arson, attempted murder, and murder, or when someone was suing someone else for injuring them in a car accident or the like, or for workmen's comp. Just provide all the unedited records you're asked for, don't delete anything, (altered or deleted records are usually more damning than the originals) and answer any questions as simply and briefly as possible. Don't volunteer anything.

On second thought, if your emails to this guy are full of profanity, it sounds like you might have some exposure; better get that lawyer.

[fatnslow]

So if one receives a subpoena for something they have nothing to do with you have to eat attorney costs just to cover your ass ? Merry fucking xmas to you Conondrum !

[mtnjam]

hey that's the guy that got run out of here back in 2005-2006, right? regardless, whoever that guy was was another intro to tgr.

yep, that was the little shit. I'm sure he's in the Alps somewhere with Jean Pierre Boespflug

[Conundrum]

Follow up... I'm impatient and a bit of a gunslinger so I called the plaintiff's attorney and asked them what documentation they were really looking for as the subpoena was vague. I don't have any exposure other than maybe a contempt charge for not responding. The attorney was cool and asked for minimal info which is a lot different than what our corporate attorney told me to provide. I will probably get an ass chewing from my corporate attorney but that's okay. A stern talking to is better than sifting through 12 years of emails, printing, and then rescanning into one file.

[spudbumkin]

https://boisedev.com/news/2018/10/17...united-states/

[LightRanger]

Just a deposition subpoena for production of records (aka a subpoena duces tecum), right C? Not for personal appearance at a depo. That's what I got from your post.

Safe decision: Consult an attorney, then produce requested records (assuming none of them are privileged or otherwise objectionable) and wait to see what happens.

Slightly-less-safe decision: Produce requested records (assuming none of them are privileged or otherwise objectionable) and wait to see what happens.

The decision to hire counsel is always going to be a personal one. Depends on the case, your relationship to it, how much you know, what the case is about, etc. For example, if the subpoena seeks records that you believe to be privileged for some reason (attorney-client, tax records, trade secret, etc.), then it's probably best to hire counsel to object/move to quash. There are cases in which I'd hire somebody to represent me, and cases in which I'd feel comfortable having my depo taken/testifying at trial without counsel. Depends on circumstances.

My $.02.

Edit: Should've refreshed the page. That's not a bad way of going about it. I've definitely done that, but usually on behalf of a client. I'd be pretty mortified if a client went and did it himself.

In fact, if the other side knew you're represented (assuming that's what the relationship is), then they could get in trouble for even talking to you. Potentially. It's not always verboten to speak to a third-party, while it would be to speak to a represented litigant on the other side without his counsel present.

[Danno]

Follow up... I'm impatient and a bit of a gunslinger so I called the plaintiff's attorney and asked them what documentation they were really looking for as the subpoena was vague. I don't have any exposure other than maybe a contempt charge for not responding. The attorney was cool and asked for minimal info which is a lot different than what our corporate attorney told me to provide. I will probably get an ass chewing from my corporate attorney but that's okay. A stern talking to is better than sifting through 12 years of emails, printing, and then rescanning into one file.

you have a corporate atty? are they representing you? or are you an independent contractor and they are not your attorney?

[wyeaster]

Follow up... I'm impatient and a bit of a gunslinger so I called the plaintiff's attorney
///
my corporate attorney

isn't this a pretty big no-no from your corporation's pov.

[Marshall Tucker]

yep, that was the little shit. I'm sure he's in the Alps somewhere with Jean Pierre Boespflug

was he the one stealing shit and selling it? vancover-ish?

[Danno]

epic thread: https://www.tetongravity.com/forums/...ght=jessejones

should be in the hall of fame, no?

[char_]

Follow up... I'm impatient and a bit of a gunslinger so I called the plaintiff's attorney and asked them what documentation they were really looking for as the subpoena was vague. I don't have any exposure other than maybe a contempt charge for not responding. The attorney was cool and asked for minimal info which is a lot different than what our corporate attorney told me to provide. I will probably get an ass chewing from my corporate attorney but that's okay. A stern talking to is better than sifting through 12 years of emails, printing, and then rescanning into one file.

Uh...I don't know shit about depositions, but I know printing electronic documents and then scanning them is dumb.

Print to PDF and E-staple the PDFs together.

[Buke]

The advice of a good attorney is almost always worth the fee.

I hate turning over records for a records subpoena. It's such a hassle to access all of those emails and then sort through them and figure out which ones apply to the case at hand.

If it comes to a deposition, that can be super stressful but I've only done it when I was working as an expert witness. The last one that I did lasted 8 hours and the whole time was spent parsing nearly every word that I had written in a report. After that I swore I'd never do that kind of work again. Who cares if I'm billing a few hundred dollars an hour, it's just not worth the headache and stress. I can't imagine what it would be like in other circumstances, where I didn't have the benefit of being the "expert" witness.

[Skistack]

Uh...I don't know shit about depositions, but I know printing electronic documents and then scanning them is dumb.

Print to PDF and E-staple the PDFs together.

Is it a corporate email address? Do you have an IT dept? They should be able to filter all your emails for the defendant's name and save them to a dropbox for the plaintiff's attorney.

[evdog]

I was deposed a few months ago and recently got a subpoena to testify in court. It was basically a bullshit dispute between our former CEO and someone claiming to be a shareholder. The events leading to this dispute happened over a decade before I started at the company and no one who is still here had ever heard of the guy. Plaintiff's attorney didn't have his shit together enough to track down anyone who was here at that time so I got nominated as the PMK (person with most knowledge) because I possess all the board minutes and financial records. Plaintiff's side had a list of demands over 30 pages long that were super broad and read like "all communications from ___ since 1999" and "all communications discussing ___ since 1999" and on and on and on. Very little of that exists anymore so we didn't produce much, and I did not review what we did sent over since it didn't seem relevant to their claim. But I got peppered with questions on those docs anyways. My answers to almost every question was "I don't know" or "I'm not aware of __". Attorney was getting pissed off because I didn't review things, and when he asked why I didn't I pointed out that reviewing a given doc wouldn't give me any more knowledge of what happened than if he read it himself. He got more to the point after that.

Plaintiff refused to settle so despite how unhelpful I was I still got a subpoena to testify in the trial. Plaintiff had to testify via skype through an interpreter because he was overseas and couldn't travel here due to the Muslim travel ban. I never got called up as both sides agreed they would present the docs without needing me to identify them. Too bad they couldn't settle as it wasn't much $$ in dispute. Such a colossal waste of everyone's time and money.