Louisiana's Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a ruling by a District Court judge and declared that a professional videographer was required when a party wished to have a deposition videotaped. In a medical malpractice case, the plaintiffs gave notice of a "videotape" deposition. At the time of the deposition, the defendants discovered that the plaintiff's attorney intended to have a staff member videotape the deposition. A court reporter was present as required under Louisiana law.
The defendants objected to the taking of the videotape deposition by an employee of the plaintiff's counsel and insisted that it be taped by a disinterested professional videographer. A motion was filed with the District Court and the matter was heard by a trial judge.
The judge agreed that plaintiff's counsel could use a staff member to record the videotape. He also ruled that the defendants could hire their own professional videographer, at their own expense. No other protections were granted by the judge. The defendants appealed.
The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals granted the writ application and reversed the District Court's decision, determining that a professional videographer was required for video depositions.
In its decision the court said:
| "It is clear that the Code of Civil Procedure article points out that accuracy and trustworthiness of the videotaped deposition must be provided for. In any nonvideotaped deposition, a certified stenographic reporter is required in order to protect the objectivity and validity as well as the accuracy and trustworthiness of the transcribed deposition. It would be inconsistent to provide for a certified professional reporter to be used when transcribing and not to require that a professional videographer be used in a videotaped deposition.
"Furthermore, it is plaintiff's request to take the deposition. It is her responsibility to provide for objectivity and trustworthiness as well as the accuracy of the deposed party. It is indeed not defendant's deposition in the instant case. It is unreasonable to require the opposing party to incur the expense of a videotape of its own. "We conclude that a party seeking a deposition, is desirous of using a videotape of that deposition, shall provide a disinterested professional videographer to take the deposition.
"Accordingly, this matter is remanded to the trial court to allow the parties to proceed consistent with the views expressed hereinabove." |