The real issue then in Esso v. Stearns,supra, was when and how the witness being examined could put on the record qualifying information -that is, facts that were contrary to or inconsistent with the answers already given by the employee or ex-employee. The case did not deal with the obligation - as opposed to the right - of the witness being examined to provide general confirmatory information. In my view, there is no such obligation. A broad request that the officer being examined inform himself and disclose all information on a particular subject and in the corporate party's possession, whether contrary to another employee's answers or not, places an unreasonable burden on the witness.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.