I suspect opposing counsel are aware. I also suspect, as far as the deposition goes, they most likely don't give a shit. Why would they?

It is useless as far as her litigation goes. All she wants it for and will be able to be used for is to attach it to any and all future piles of crap she files, just as the does the useless GA hearing transcript and daffydavits of so-called experts, etc.

IANAL but I believe it may be illegal or improper to depose a witness without having opposing counsel present. Both sides must be able to depose witnesses. It is funny Orly wants to depose Viviano. Viviano told even The Globe she had no real evidence, just a belief. I don't think the courts have changed their opinion on hearsay and belief testimony. Anything Viviano would have to say is likely inadmissible anyway and just add to Orly's difficulties. I may be wrong but why depose hearsay witnesses if you're opposing counsel unless you just want to rattle some cages? Anything they say will be thrown out. On the other hand, the entertainment value would be priceless.

It's hard to believe some of her stuff this weekend isn't a deliberate joke.

I know, I know.

The uninitiated might agree, but the same thing could have been said about the Farrar hearing in Atlanta.

And look at what she achieved. All of her evidence and testimony is now officially on the record -- and, not only that, but she's got autographed DVDs to sell.

Orly nevah disappoints.

I just came across some amusing information ... but it might be too much help
PM for info ...

I have been thinking the same thing.

I replied to a few folks ... and suggested realist decide if it can be posted yet.
(Since the victim of her subpoena agreed to testify, it's probably moot).

Has she mailed her victim a check in advance for mileage and per diem? I dunno about Mississippi court procedure, but up here ......

Just sayin'.

I have a serious question: When does an interview become a deposition? Orly can interview Ms. Viviano any time she wants, she can even have a court reporter there if she wants. She doesn't need any court authorization for that if Viviano agrees to it. She can also ask Ms. Viviano to sign a daffydavit. Who cares?

What conditions have to exist to change it from an interview or conversation to a deposition? And why does it matter?

She used the wrong form, and probably the wrong procedure for her subpoena. The right people already knew it ... but since the "victim" has agreed to testify, it's moot.

An interview becomes a deposition when it is conducted under the rules of the jurisdiction of the case, including any rule requiring notice to all parties that a deposition will be taken.

Anything short of that is not a deposition and no part of it is admissible as a deposition in a court of law.

A deposition must be conducted under oath (usually administered by the court reporter/notary public) with proper notice to opposing parties.

If the opposing parties (usually by counsel) decide to attend, they are permitted to conduct what amounts to cross-examination and may object to questions. If the deponent is an opposing party or potential witness for the opposing party, the attorney "defending the deposition" may also instruct the deponent not to answer. This occurs most often when the subject matter strays to something that is "none of their business" and unreasonably violates the deponent's privacy.

In contrast, an interview is not limited to the subject matter of a particular lawsuit and does not require notice to or accommodation of the opposing parties. And obviously, all responses are strictly voluntary.

Since you asked about using a daffydavit instead, I'd note that there is such a thing as a written deposition. Questions can be submitted in writing, subject to notice to opposing party, and the deponent can reply to questions in writing and then have them notarized. Done properly, it has the same legal effect as an oral deposition. (Jes sayin' as a piece of trivia.)

The renting a car, I get. But what's the smart phone warning about?

Probably means a GPS tracker?

"They" can use the GPS to track you.

I'd imagine that Mr. Tepper[nator], if served properly and timely, would relish the opportunity to cross examine "top producer" Buttina Vulviano under oath.

Can we getz a transcript?

Actually "they" do not even need GPS. Cell phones without GPS may be located using the relative signal strength from multiple cell towers. This is how the Google Maps app works on smart phones w/o GPS.

Judge Coleman will forever drop tears over the fact that he missed the opportunity to shove this case to a lucky collegue

Assumes facts not in evidence. Judge Coleman may step down from this case at any time he chooses.

A question, I haz one.

Orly sez she's looking for a court reporter to court report on her deposition. I'm assuming court reporters with any experience have basic knowledge of things like depositions. Is there any obligation on the part of the CR to point out that some procedures are not being followed, such as failure of opposing counsel to attend? Or does the CR just sit down and court report, and keep their yap shut?

I am very sure that the Teppernator is following closely what gets written on Orlys blog. And Orly may be in for a surprise should the Missouri lawyer send his assistant to the hearing, Orly always wanted to meet Mr. Tepper face to face.

Some suck-egg court reporter may confirm or deny my assertion: No. In California, the court reporter shows up, swears the witness and takes down the proceedings, whether they make any sense or not and no matter who has been informed of them or not.