A Qualitative Evaluation of Litigation Training Materials in Attorney Preparation for and Undertaking of A Deposition: A Study of Role Format
Lisnek, Paul Michael
This item is only available for download by members of the University of Illinois community. Students, faculty, and staff at the U of I may log in with your NetID and password to view the item. If you are trying to access an Illinois-restricted dissertation or thesis, you can request a copy through your library's Inter-Library Loan office or purchase a copy directly from ProQuest.
Permalink
https://hdl.handle.net/2142/77286
Description
Title
A Qualitative Evaluation of Litigation Training Materials in Attorney Preparation for and Undertaking of A Deposition: A Study of Role Format
Author(s)
Lisnek, Paul Michael
Issue Date
1986
Department of Study
Speech Communication
Discipline
Speech Communication
Degree Granting Institution
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Degree Name
Ph.D.
Degree Level
Dissertation
Keyword(s)
Speech Communication
Language
eng
Abstract
Attorney advocacy training manuals set out prescriptive rules to be applied uniformly across depositions. The study evaluates the utility of these materials as they relate to the interplay between the participants of the deposition. Pre-study surveys of attorneys investigated advocacy education and attorney perceptions of deposition purposes and objections. Erving Goffman's conception of "role", modified by Robert Strong's concept of "role format" (the modification of role in interaction by other available roles) provided the theoretical orientation for the analysis. Role formats were studied in deposition transcripts. A transcript review suggested a natural three-phase division of the interaction: examination of the background of the deponent, the incident in question and the injuries suffered by the plaintiff. A coding scheme was developed to identify objective components of objections occurring in each phase of the deposition. The analysis was pursued on three levels: (1) a study of particular objection confrontations occurring in each of the three sections of each deposition; (2) a commentary on rule violations over the course of particular depositions; and (3) the patterning and sequencing of rule violations across depositions. The coding was supplemented by interpretive and descriptive commentary. The study found that attorneys have a variety of role formats available to them. Examiners can be "adversarial" or "cooperative" in their questioning; deponent's attorney may enforce the rules diligently or with an effort to maintain a cooperative atmosphere. The objection confrontations between attorneys was found to shape the direction in the interaction, and the status of each side's theory of the case. Finally, it was suggested that advocacy training materials need to be supplemented to incorporate a consideration of available role formats and the implications of their use.
Use this login method if you
don't
have an
@illinois.edu
email address.
(Oops, I do have one)
IDEALS migrated to a new platform on June 23, 2022. If you created
your account prior to this date, you will have to reset your password
using the forgot-password link below.
