Federal rules make it mandatory that a formal notice of a deposition

Unit III Questions
1. Dispositions Summaries
Federal rules make it mandatory that a formal notice of a deposition to be given to the deponent and every party or their representative. The depositions permit a party’s attorney to question a witness or a party in a case spontaneously and under oath before the beginning of the trial and to record a statement. In this regard, the deposition presents an objective, concise clerical digest of a deposition transcript’s main points. These three types of deposition summaries that include chronological, topical and page-line deposition summaries.
Page-line deposition summary
The page-line deposition summary is intended to reveal exhibit and a summary of testimony by presenting them as relevant page line references. In this case, Superstar Construction Company was involved in contraction of a defective fish pod for Mrs. Nikita
Deposition Summary
Jimmy Warder (Owner of Superstar Construction Company)
Nikita v. Superstar Construction Company
Page: Line
Subject Summary
Examination by Mr. Edgar
P4:22 8:30 Exhibit 1: Subpoena Persona details Lives in Los Angeles and business address P1648.
P 4:30 9:21
Education and qualification Attended German Architectural Institute
P 5:11 10:30
Work background worked on different projects in Germany and the US.
Some of the projects failed to meet building and
Standards.
5:17 12:30 previous legal suit in line of duty
Sued for defective construction of a fence.

Topical: Dispositions Summary
Topical depositions seek to capture details of every event in the legal cases. This case will address injury compensation for Nikita after suffering a hand and head injury while working at Sweet food Manufacturer
Re: Nikita vs. Sweet food Manufacturer
Date of Deposition: August 18, 2020
Work History:
The applicant, Mrs. Nikita, cannot attend work at the Sweet Food Supplies manufactures after suffering an accident while in the line of duty. Since the accident, Mrs. Nikita has not been in a position to engage in any constructive work has only been receiving insurance benefits and no other income. Mrs. Nikita has worked at Sweet Food Manufactures for twelve years as a production manager.
Injury (March 1, 2020)
Nikita suffered head and hand injuries in the course of his normal operations at her place of work. On a fateful day, boxes full of canned food fell on her from the warehouse, hurting her head and hands. The multiple injuries rendered her unconscious, and she was rushed to a nearby hospital. She was discharged one month later.
Past History
Nikita was in an excellent health condition that enabled her to work appropriately for his employer until she suffered an accident while at work. Nikita had no previously known condition that would prevent her from working. This evidence shows that the inability to resume work is entirely due to the accident suffered while working.
Medical and Surgical History
Nikita’s doctor Dr. Willy said that he had attended Nikita for eight years. Nikita had only being diagnosed with bowel and colon problems. The doctor stated that the Nikita suffered multiple injuries in the head and hands and was managing the pain occasioned by the injuries. In this regard, the doctor recommended that Nikita needed bed rest for three months and, thereafter, uninterrupted therapy for six months.
Chronological disposition Summary
Chronological dispositions summary seeks to capture the series of events leading to the case at hand. This enables the relevant parties to a case to understand the issues and facts surrounding them. In this case, Nikita is filing for a divorce to his husband of eleven years.
Nikita vs. Johnny
Date Events
December 9, 2008:
Nikita and Johnny met in a work-related workshop and became friends. Johnny
and Nikita started dating thereafter.
August 18, 2009:
Johnny married Nikita in Los Angeles. The wedding was officiated by Revered.
Jameson Walker.
January 1, 2013:
Johnny engaged in excessive drinking thus becoming violent towards Nikita and
their then two-year-old daughter.
May 23, 2013:
Johnny and Nikita began their marriage counseling sessions to end the marital
Conflicts they were then facing.
August 26, 2015:
Johnny resumed to his previously drinking habit and engaged in violence with
And people in the neighborhood. Additionally, at this period, Johnny was in misuse of money and resources.
January 5, 2016: Nikita moved out of their matrimonial with their only daughter and separated
with Johnny.
Question 2: Danny case
In the case that Danny, a defendant, is requested by the plaintiff to present relevant documents to a case in the process of discovery, then Danny fails to comply. On filling a motion to compel Danny in complying, the court grants the motion. In this case, an order compelling Danny to cooperate by presenting the documents is issued by the court, but Danny refuses to comply.
In the case that Danny refuses to honor the court order as the plaintiff, I have to take the necessary and legal actions to ensure that to court order is honored. Orders issued by courts are legally binding, and thus they are enforceable. In some cases, the courts are responsible for drawing up, serving and enforcing court orders (Roos, 2006). In this case, as the plaintiff am tasked with enforcing the court order. In this regard, approach the right persons, authorities and organizations to ensure the defendant complies with the court order. In this case, one identifies other right parties to have the order complied, such as company/government ministry concerned, organizations involved in the activity in question and any other party involved in enforcing the order. Additionally, one can take other legal actions to have the court order enforced. More so, create formal pressure by getting the help of law enforcers (police or authorities), regulatory bodies, and government departments. For instance, In the case of Shell Gas Fare in Nigeria, Shell v. Local communities, the local communities got orders against shell to stop the burning of natural gas, but shell ignored the court order (Frynas, 2000). In this regard, the local communities approached high government authorities to have the court order implemented.
c. Power of the court to enforce the court orders
On normal occasions, the courts are expected to ensure that court orders are effectively enforced. If one party is unwilling to implement court orders, then the courts give extra court orders that will be implemented by law enforcement and other relevant authorities (Anderson, 2003). In this case, the courts can issue search and seizure orders to have the documents presented to the court and then to the plaintiff. Additionally, courts can issue further orders that include freezing injunctions, debt, charging and attachment earnings orders. For instance, in the case of Texaco/Chevron v. Ecuador, the court issued a court order requiring Texaco/Chevron to pay $9.5 billion in compensation for environmental pollution (Pigrau, 2014). In enforcing the court order, the court moved to bring another case in Canada requiring the court to Freeze Texaco/Chevron Canadian assets until the compensation was settled.
C. Action taken to the defendant Danny attorney
Lawyers have different duties to the court, and failure to adhere to the duties lands them on the wrong side of the law. In this regard, the attorney must educate and guide their clients on the court process to promote public confidence in the administration of justice. On the other hand, lawyers have to act with integrity and professionalism in the course of maintaining their overreaching responsibilities in the interest of civil conduct (Epstein, 2005). In case the attorney is involved in misleading the client to go against the court order or is involved in hiding the required documents, then there is a possibility that the court will take legal action against the lawyer. For instance, in the case of R. V. Wijesinha, the attorney in the case was found to collaborate with the defendant in presenting misleading the court, and thus the court upheld the criminal conviction and forwarded the lawyer to the law society for investigation (Bell and Abela, 2012). The attorneys involved in illegalities or crimes against courts can have different negative consequences, such as their certificates being withdrawn.
Question 3: Robyn Robinson case
Robyn Robinson filed a case against Rykon Industries, her former employer arguing that she was terminated because she had filed a complaint with the Department of Justice on accounts that she was being required to engage in a price-fixing conspiracy.
1. The Attorney-client privilege is lost since the attorney was involved in reveling client confidential information to the defendant (Sisk and Abbate, 2010). Client information should be at all times be kept confidential and only shared with the authorization of the client. In this case, the attorney shared confidential information with the defendant leading to Robyn losing her job.
2. In the case that Rykon refuses to answer interrogatories, then sanctions can be preferred on both the attorney and Rykon. Failure to answer interrogatories calls for a motion to compel the parties to do so (Zelmer, 2005). In this case, failure by Rykon to answer interrogatories inclines the court to punish the attorney and Rykon through sanctions to their respective operations.
3. In the case that Robinson attorney has many questions but Robinson is operating on tight budgets, then the attorney will have to use relatively cheap discovery ways and within the set budget. In this regard, the lawyer can allow the application of dispositions to enable the admission of witnesses and evidence. Additionally, the attorney can seek subpoenas deuces tecum to enhance request for production and inspection.
4. There is a high possibility that Robinson’s former boss will discard internal personnel records that reflect Robinson was an outstanding employee. Robinson’s termination was implemented to conceal illegal operations in the organizations and not his acts of personal acts or omissions or commissions against the company. In this regard, the employer will be compelled to discard any evidence and document indicating that she was an ideal employee. This approach will enable the employer device legal reasons to form terminating Robinson.