Invalid Deposition Notices

Earlier this year I was involved in a multi-party case and a third-party defendant noticed a 30(b)(6) deposition of the third-party plaintiff. The notice listed appropriate topics, but stated the time and place were “TBD.” The notice was accompanied by a letter advising that the noticing party intended the notice merely as a “placeholder” and would work with opposing counsel to schedule a date. Fair enough, but the deposition notices themselves were invalid.

In Dargis v. Wyeth, Inc.[1] “Plaintiffs initially served notices of deposition for their treating physicians and other medical personnel while the cases still were pending in MDL Court. Those ‘placeholder’ notices did not provide a date, time, or location for the depositions.” Notices like these were struck “as being noncompliant with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(b)(1).” In reality, “those notices were invalid ab initio because they failed to specify a time or place, as required by Rule 30(b)(1).”

[1] 04-3967, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 189881 (D. Minn. 2012).