# Legal Standards and Compliance This reference covers the procedural rules, evidence rules, ethics obligations, and anti-hallucination guardrails that govern deposition preparation outputs. ## Table of Contents 1. Governing Procedural Rules 2. Evidence Rules for Exhibits and Impeachment 3. Ethics of Witness Preparation 4. Attorney-Client Privilege 5. Anti-Hallucination Rule for Authorities 6. Malpractice Risk Areas --- ## 1. Governing Procedural Rules **FRCP 30** governs depositions by oral examination in federal court: - **FRCP 30(d)(1)** — seven-hour presumptive time limit (one day of seven hours) unless otherwise stipulated or ordered - **FRCP 30(c)(2)** — objection and instruction-not-to-answer standards; a person may be instructed not to answer only to preserve a privilege, enforce a court-ordered limitation, or present a motion under FRCP 30(d)(3) - **FRCP 30(d)(2) and (3)** — sanctions and protective order mechanisms **FRCP 26** governs discovery scope: - **FRCP 26(b)(1)** — relevance and proportionality - **FRCP 26(a)** — required disclosures - **FRCP 26(a)(2)** — expert disclosure requirements - **FRCP 26(e)** — supplementation obligations **FRCP 32** governs the use of depositions in court proceedings, including admissibility standards that vary by context. Flag specific FRCP 32 applications for attorney verification. --- ## 2. Evidence Rules for Exhibits and Impeachment **FRE 612** — Writings used to refresh a witness's memory. If a document is used to refresh recollection during testimony, the adverse party may be entitled to production of the writing. Plan preparation questions with this risk in mind. **FRE 613** — Prior inconsistent statements for impeachment. Requirements include disclosure obligations and the opportunity to explain or deny. Where state evidence rules differ from federal on these points, mark the issue for attorney verification rather than asserting a specific state standard. **FRE 702** — Expert testimony admissibility. Amended effective December 1, 2023, to clarify that the proponent must establish admissibility by a preponderance of the evidence and that reliability requirements apply to both the expert's opinion and its application to the facts. Track the rule text from a verifiable source rather than paraphrasing aggressively. Flag any interpretive gloss for attorney verification. **FRE 803(6)** — Business records hearsay exception. Relevant to document foundation when the witness is the custodian or a knowledgeable participant. **FRE 901** — Authentication requirements. Prepare foundation scripts for every major exhibit. --- ## 3. Ethics of Witness Preparation **ABA Formal Opinion 508** addresses witness preparation ethics. An attorney may discuss the case and evidence with the witness, review documents, and walk through likely questions, but cannot coach false testimony. Key Model Rules (verify specific text and rule number in the governing jurisdiction, as individual jurisdictions adopt and may modify these): - **Model Rule 3.3** (candor toward the tribunal) — requires correction of known false testimony - **Model Rule 3.4** (fairness to opposing party and counsel) — prohibits obstructing access to evidence - **Model Rule 1.1** — competent representation, including understanding of procedural rules and evidentiary consequences - **Model Rule 1.6** — protection of information relating to the representation - **Model Rule 5.3** — responsibilities regarding nonlawyer assistants When preparing a defending witness, the prep session agenda must explicitly prohibit coaching false testimony while still being substantively useful—reviewing key documents, reviewing prior statements, walking through likely question sequences, and practicing concise answers. --- ## 4. Attorney-Client Privilege When defending, be vigilant about **Upjohn** warnings in the corporate context—the attorney-client privilege extends to communications between corporate counsel and employees at all levels when made for the purpose of obtaining legal advice. If a question asks for the contents of a conversation with counsel, the defending attorney must object and instruct the witness not to answer to preserve the privilege under FRCP 30(c)(2). Communications with counsel and deposition preparation materials can be discoverable in narrow circumstances: - When used to refresh under FRE 612 - Where waiver occurs "What did you review" preparation questions must be planned with privilege strategy in mind. --- ## 5. Anti-Hallucination Rule for Authorities This is a hard guardrail with no exceptions: - Cite FRCP and FRE using Cornell LII URLs: `https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp` and `https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre` - For any additional legal authorities (case law, state rules, local rules, ethics opinions), either provide a verifiable URL from an official or reputable source, or mark the citation `[VERIFY — attorney must confirm]` - Never generate invented case citations or rule references under any circumstances - If the outline includes "expected answers," label them explicitly as hypotheses, never as facts - Include a citation verification note in every output: *"All non-rule authorities require attorney verification; no case citations were generated unless sourced by URL."* --- ## 6. Malpractice Risk Areas The highest-risk areas in deposition work, with mitigation strategies: **Misstating the governing deposition limit** → Always confirm the actual limit; don't assume the federal 7-hour default applies **Improper instructions not to answer triggering sanctions** → Map every potential instruction to the three permitted bases under FRCP 30(c)(2): privilege, court-ordered limitation, or motion under 30(d)(3) **Missing key element admissions because the outline is untethered** → Tie every major question line back to the issue map **Eliciting harmful testimony through compound or sloppy questions** → Keep questions single-fact; plan exhibit sequencing in advance **Waiving privilege through careless preparation inquiries** → Plan "what did you review" questions with privilege strategy in mind **Failing to preserve correction mechanisms** → Include completeness and correction opportunities **Failing to object to correctable form errors** → Flag that form objections not made at deposition may be waived at trial (varies by jurisdiction) Mitigation across all areas: use the issue map, enforce the time allocation, keep questions single-fact, sequence exhibits deliberately, and flag privilege and correction rules for attorney review.