Legal Question in Civil Litigation in California

Video depos are best used where you have a witness who may be unavailable at trial and who makes a very good or credible witness, or a witness who's physical behaviour and demenor is expected to be relevant or persuasive beyond their testimony. It's not rocket science. If you expect to use the deposition at trial and you expect the witness' appearance or demenor to have a desireable effect on the jury, then video is a good idea. Otherwise it is a waste of money.

To understand the advantages and disadvantages of a video deposition, you first have to understand the what and why of depositions. Usually the purpose of any deposition is to pin down the deponent so that he or she will find it difficult to change his or her story on the witness stand at trial. Video depositions are costly. They are useful 1) for getting the testimony of doctors or other expert witnesses who charge hourly fees; 2) for preserving the testimony of people who are sufficiently elderly or infirm that you think they might die by the time of trial; and 3) if you think the video image of the witness' demeanor will be useful at trial. Normally only 1) and 2) can be cost-effective for litigants.

The best use of a video deposition in a personal injury case where the deposition is of the defendant: Use portions in opening statements where the defendant has made incriminating statements. Video depos are very effective in opening statements.