Alberto v. Toyota Motor Corp.
Michigan Court of Appeals
1DissentJansen, J.
I cannot join the majority’s announcement of a broad, new “apex-deposition rule” shielding high-ranking corporate officers from certain discovery in Michigan litigation. Nor can I conclude, under existing principles of Michigan law, that the trial court abused its discretion by denying defendant’s1 motion for a protective order to quash the scheduled depositions of Yoshimi Inaba and Jim Lentz. Accordingly, I must respectfully dissent.
I
As explained by the majority, plaintiff noticed the video depositions of Inaba, defendant’s chairman and chief executive officer, and Lentz, defendant’s…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Domako v. RoweMichigan Supreme Court · 1991
- Bloomfield Charter Township v. Oakland County ClerkMichigan Court of Appeals · 2002
- Reed Dairy Farm v. Consumers Powers Co.Michigan Court of Appeals · 1998
- Savage v. Peterson Distributing Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1967
- Wilson v. Saginaw Circuit JudgeMichigan Supreme Court · 1963
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.