Overbroad Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 30(b)(6) Deposition Notices

Corporations are required, under Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 30(b)(6) to produce a witness or witnesses who can testify about specific topics identified in the Deposition Notice. Sometimes, corporations are served with Notices that have 20, 30 or 40 topics. It can be difficult, if not impossible to prepare a witness for all of those topics.  This creates a further risk to corporations because there is case law that provides that a corporation cannot offer evidence on a topic that was covered by a 30(b)(6) notice if the witness was not prepared to testify that topic. [See previous post on this blog]

Courts, however, have shown a willingness to limit overly broad Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 30(b)(6) notices.   The best discussion is by Magistrate Judge Facciola:  - 

"a 30(b)(6) deposition, which by its nature can be time-consuming and inefficient, be productive and not simply an excuse to seek information that is already known. See Banks v. Office of the Senate Sargeant of Arms, 222 F.R.D. 7, 19 (D.D.C. 2004) (ordering the parties to find topics that will "insure that the 30(b)(6) depositions are meaningful exercises in ascertaining information that has not been previously discovered" and ordering the party seeking discovery "not [to] ask questions that duplicate questions previously asked of other witness or seek information that he already has by virtue of responses to other discovery devices")"

Tri-State Hosp. Supply Corp. v. United States, 226 F.R.D. 118, 126 (D.D.C 2005)

See also Accord Crocs, Inc. v. Effervescent, Inc., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 27082 (D. Colo. 2017) (affirming Magistrate Judge's ruling narrowing seventeen 30(b)(6) topics  to one topic. Magistrate Judge ruled that the notice was not proportional and covered topics better suited to less onerous discovery)