Playing Defense at 30(b)(6) Depositions (2026 Edition)

Mark Johnson | Offit Kurman

With over three decades of construction, environmental, and real estate litigation experience, Mark Johnson brings seasoned leadership to complex legal challenges. He has served as lead counsel in over 30 jury trials, bench trials, and high-stakes arbitrations, handling disputes across construction, environmental compliance, land use, landlord-tenant issues, oil and gas, real estate, and toxic torts.

Mark’s construction law practice encompasses representing owners, general contractors, subcontractors, and design professionals in private and public works disputes. His extensive experience includes resolving claims involving extra work, changed conditions, delays, loss of productivity, defective workmanship, product liability for construction materials, insurance coverage for construction defect claims and property damage claims, including fire damage claims, and California contractor licensing laws. He has successfully navigated construction disputes in state and federal courts across multiple states and before the federal Civilian Board of Contract Appeals and California’s Public Works Contract Arbitration program.

In the environmental realm, Mark has litigated cases involving CERCLA, the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, CEQA, RCRA, the Toxic Substances Control Act, the California Coastal Act, the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Act, Proposition 65, and other environmental regulations. His work includes addressing petroleum products and hazardous substance contamination of soil and groundwater, toxic tort claims arising from exposure to substances including asbestos and benzene, performing due diligence on environmental conditions in corporate and real estate transactions, and insurance coverage for environmental contamination. He also advises on compliance with environmental laws, defending clients in enforcement actions initiated by agencies such as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the California Air Resources Board, and various California water quality boards.

Mark also represents creditors in Chapter 7 and Chapter 11 bankruptcy cases involving environmental damage claims. A respected author and speaker, he regularly shares his insights on legal and regulatory developments impacting the construction industry.

Sarah Rawls | Butler Snow LLP

Sarah is a member of Butler Snow’s Commercial Litigation group, where she represents a diverse range of companies in complex disputes from inception through resolution. Her practice spans the full litigation lifecycle, beginning with pre-suit investigations, strategic risk assessments, and early dispute resolution, and extending to serving as trial counsel in courtrooms and arbitration hearings. She focuses on contract disputes, insurance coverage and bad-faith claims, and data privacy. Before joining Butler Snow, Sarah clerked for the Hon. R. David Proctor in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama.

David G. Mayhan | Butler Snow LLP

David G. Mayhan is a seasoned trial lawyer in Butler Snow’s Tort, Transportation & Specialized Litigation Group, with a practice spanning commercial and construction disputes, insurance matters, product-liability defense, and other high-exposure civil litigation. With decades of first-chair and trial-team experience including defense verdicts and significant wins in complex construction, commercial, and product cases. David brings a practical, defense-forward approach to Rule 30(b)(6) strategy: Locking down topic scope, building a defensible “reasonable investigation” record, preparing witnesses for corporate-knowledge traps, and managing privilege/ work-product and document-use issues in real time.

David is also a frequent CLE and litigation-training contributor, including as co-author of “Practice Pointers & Potential Pitfalls of a Corporate Deposition” (2024 Litigation Update: Navigating Emerging Trends and Technology) directly aligned with 30(b)(6) preparation and defense themes. He has served in leadership roles within Colorado’s defense bar, including chairing the Colorado Defense Lawyers Association Trial Academy and helping lead trial-skills programs for litigators.

Natalie DuBose | Haynes and Boone LLP

Natalie DuBose is an insurance-recovery professional who has successfully represented a number of businesses—large and small—under all types of commercial insurance policies, including directors and officers, commercial general liability, property, errors and omissions, builder’s risk, fidelity, and cyber. Natalie has a decade of experience helping businesses navigate complex insurance disputes. Natalie has developed a business-oriented approach to insurance recovery and a unique understanding of her clients’ goals and actively consults with clients on cost-effective solutions to manage risk and maximize insurance recovery.

Natalie has worked with dozens of clients in the financial services, construction, and healthcare sectors to recover under claims following significant litigation events or natural disasters. Natalie has consistently shown a track record of success in representing corporate policyholders in coverage disputes in state and federal courts across Texas and beyond, and in arbitrations, mediations, and appeals at the state and federal level.

Natalie has been recognized as the Best Lawyers in America for Insurance Law every year since 2019 and has been recognized as a Rising Star in Insurance by Texas Super Lawyers. She is the Chair of the Dallas Bar Association’s Tort and Insurance Practice Section, where she has served as a board member since 2016. She has chaired many ABA insurance conferences and is a regular speaker and writer on insurance topics, including for the Texas Insurance Law Journal and the Texas Bar Advanced Insurance Law seminar.

David Taubenfeld | Haynes and Boone LLP

David Taubenfeld represents policyholders in every kind of dispute they may have with their insurers. He finds coverage where others may not look, and he attempts to secure coverage for his clients through negotiation and diplomacy before litigation becomes necessary. When litigation becomes necessary, he litigates aggressively, always with the goal of securing coverage for his clients quickly and economically. He has secured millions of dollars in coverage for his clients through negotiation and litigation.

David represents corporate and individual insureds in coverage and bad-faith lawsuits and arbitrations against insurance carriers under Directors’ and Officers’ Liability, First Party Property/Business Interruption, Errors and Omissions, Professional Liability, General Liability, Fidelity Surety Bonds, Performance and Payment, Primary, Excess, and Umbrella insurance policies. David also litigates construction matters for architects, engineers, contractors and owners. He litigates both the construction disputes themselves and any insurance coverage matters related to his construction work.

David is AV® Peer Review Rated Preeminent by Martindale-Hubbell® Law Directory. David was included in The Best Lawyers in America, Woodward/White, Inc., for Insurance Law, 2013-2026, for Litigation – Construction, 2021-2026, and recognized in D Magazine’s “Best Lawyers in Dallas,” D Magazine Partners, 2018 and 2020. David was also named “Appellate Lawyer of the Week” by Texas Lawyer, ALM Media Properties, LLC, December 2, 2013.

Session I – Responding to a Voluminous and Potentially Objectionable 30(b)(6) Deposition Notice | 1:00pm – 1:30pm

• Rule 30(b)(6) “reasonable particularity” requirement and why voluminous notices can signal overreach
• Common defects courts find improper
  • Overly broad/vague topics
  • Lack of particularity
  • Decades-long scopes without limits
  • Legal conclusions/privilege
  • Duplicative discovery
  • Impossible prep
  • Irrelevance
  • Document requests embedded in the notice (Rule 34 issues)
• Serving written objections that are specific (not boilerplate)
• Meet-and-confer strategy to narrow/clarify topics, consolidate duplication, and negotiate logistics (date/time/witness count)
• Proposing reasonable limits (time and subject-matter limits, excluding privileged/legal analysis, phased depositions, written substitutes) to show good faith
• Protective orders under Rule 26(c): When to move, what relief to seek (strike/limit/boundaries), and cost-shifting in extreme cases

Session II – Drafting an Effective Rule 30 (b)(6) Notice of Deposition | 1:30pm – 2:00pm

• Rule 30(b)(6) foundation and the 2020 amendments requiring good-faith conferral and reasonable particularity
  • Key language, naming an entity as the deponent and describing “with reasonable particularity the matters for examination”
  • 2020 requirement that the serving party and the organization “must confer in good faith about the matters for examination
• Strategic timing and goals/themes: Why 30(b)(6) can avoid the “run-around,” and why it is often a “one-shot” deposition
  • Using 30(b)(6) to get binding answers “while avoiding the run-around” of serial individual depositions
  • Why most courts treat it as a “one-shot” chance per entity, so topic drafting matters
• Practice pointers: Drafting topics that comply, what to avoid and why
  • Walk through pitfalls as “very general questions,” vague/open-ended wording such as “including but not limited to,”
  • Topics that veer into “legal theories or legal strategy” and risk privilege/work product concerns
• What “passes muster”: Building topic lists that are particular, relevant, and proportional, using real examples and take-home points
  • Suggested questions and take-home points: Topics should be pled with “reasonable particularity,” generally relevant to claims/defenses, and “proportional” with specificity, careful tailoring, and reasonable limits in scope and time

Break | 2:00pm – 2:10pm

Session III – From Deposition to Verdict: Offensive and Defensive Tactics of Rule 30(b)(6) Witnesses | 2:10pm – 3:10pm

• Selecting and preparing corporate representatives: Duties, scope of preparation, and limits on obligation to educate
• Conducting and defending depositions: Best practices, objections, privilege issues, and reconciling testimony
• Leveraging testimony at trial: Using deposition testimony for impeachment, admissions, and summary judgment
• Emerging trends and case law: Recent rulings, sanctions, and evolving standards for adequacy of preparation