This addresses the August 7 article, “Deposing the Giant Under the Apex Doctrine.” The so-called “apex doctrine” is another of those tools first created by the defense industry to stymie discovery of evidence. Years ago the Defense Research Institute did something similar by fabricating a theory about “the sanctions tort.” Here's what two distinguished federal jurists had to say about the proposition that someone is too important to be deposed:

“I am befuddled by an argument that status alone creates a different set of rules for important people. … In my view, important people are subject to the same rules as the working man or woman.” Hon. Donald W. Molloy, Order, Phillips v. General Motors Corp., No. 98-168 (D. Mont. Feb. 24, 2000), Doc. 69 (Molloy, J.).

“The Court is unpersuaded by Defendants' implication that we have a 'caste' litigation system which divides witnesses into classes—a privileged class that must be protected from the inconveniences associated with litigation and everyone else who must put aside private matters temporarily for the administration of justice.” Hon. Clay D. Land, Order, Synovus Trust Co. v. Honda Motor Co., No. 03-140 (M.D. Ga. Aug. 11, 2004) (Land, J.), ECF 104.