Texas Lawyers

Joe Jamail has an old fashioned Texas Style Deposition

25 thoughts on “Texas Lawyers”

  1. This is from May of 1992. The deposition was taken in St Louis. The
    deponent is “Jack Garrett” who was at one time a research chemist at
    Monsanto’s Texas City facility in the 1950’s. Monsanto (represented by Ed
    Carstarphen on the left), was being sued by some residents of Houston
    (represented by Joe “Hairpiece” Jamail on the right with the wagging
    finger) who alleged that Monsanto had harmed them by exposing them to
    dangerous chemicals. The suit was settled out of court for $39 million.
    “Tucker” was an attorney representing Ayrshire. There is an Ayrshire a
    real estate development company in Houston, so I can only assume it’s the
    same company, though I’m not sure of their role in this case. It’s
    probably got something to do with property values allegedly impacted by

  2. Wow! What’s funny is that Joe is the greatest lawyer in history! Seriously,
    he is a billionaire, from winning dozens and dozens of cases for the under
    dog, he goes after the big corporate bad guys like a rabid dog. He is Texan
    and a genius that grew up in the depression . That’s a triple threat!

  3. A little explanation for what is going on in the deposition for those who
    are unfamiliar with them. Joe Jamail is the person off camera to the right.
    He is deposing (what I assume to be) an expert witness for the Defendant in
    that case, the Monsanto Corp. The guy just off screen to the left is Edward
    M. Carstarphen, the Defense attorney representing Monsanto. The other voice
    you hear(‘Tucker”) is either a co-plaintiff’s or co-defendant’s attorney.
    Joe begins by asking the witness if he met with the attorney for Monsanto
    and what was discussed. Since the attorney represents Monsanto, and not the
    witness, there is no attorney-client privilege over such communications.
    The witness doesn’t answer the question truthfully. It degrades from there.
    Carstarphen objects and tries to instruct the witness. Since he isn’t the
    attorney for the witness, he gets called on instructing him. 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *