Ready to Register?

MyLawCLE All-Access Pass

Best choice

Add the All-Access Pass and get this program —
plus 1,000+ live CLE programs every year.


All specialty & ethics credits included
38 practice areas
New sections: AI & the Law, Practice Management
100s of current and trending legal topics
Nationally recognized and highly experienced presenters

$395 / year — this program included
Register with the All-Access Pass

This program + 1,000+ CLE programs, all year

Or register for just this program

Live Video Broadcast

Live webinar of this one program.
$195 Register

On-Demand Video

Recorded access + self-study credit.
$195 Register

Deposition Errata in Federal Court After the 2026 Hearsay Amendment: Making, Striking, and Using the Changes

Amended Rule 801(d)(1)(A) takes effect December 1, 2026, raising the stakes of deposition errata sheets. Learn to decide which changes to make within thirty days, draft reason lines, plead the strike to your circuit’s standard, and shift reopening costs to the changing party.

2026-12-15 12:00:00

Program Details

2026-12-15 12:00:00

Program Details

2026-12-15 12:00:00

Over 1,000+ webinars

2026-12-15 12:00:00

Course Overview

The Thirty-Day Errata Window Just Got More Expensive

2026-12-15 12:00:00

Effective December 1, 2026, amended Federal Rule of Evidence 801(d)(1)(A) changes the trial value of prior deposition testimony. The amendment removes the oath requirement and applies to pending cases where practicable. That raises the stakes of every errata sheet, the changes a witness may make to a transcript within 30 days under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(e).

Miss the on-record review request and the certificate notation, and the right to change the transcript is lost. Reverse an answer, and courts applying EBC, Inc. v. Clark Building Systems and In re Injectafer strike it while the original stays usable. Make a substantive change, and the deposition reopens, summary judgment waits, and under Lugtig v. Thomas the reopening costs land on the changing party. Change a non-party’s answer after December 1, and its value shifts with the witness’s status.

Attendees leave with an errata triage worksheet for sorting each change by what it does, a response decision tree for choosing among a strike, a narrowed reopen motion, or presenting both answers to a jury, and sample reopen-motion language with itemized costs. Each tool rests on the judgment calls made inside the thirty-day window, not a recital of the rule.

Format

CLE Credit

2h CLE Credits

Level

Intermediate

Length

2

Key topics that will be covered

01
Preserving the Errata Window
How locking the review request on the record and in the officer’s certificate, fixing Day 0 of the Rule 30(e) thirty-day clock, and running the page-and-line check before signature decide whether any change survives a timing and procedure audit.
02
Sorting and Justifying Changes
How classifying each proposed change by what it does to the testimony, and writing a reason line that meets the “some reason” standard of EBC, Inc. v. Clark Building Systems, separates the completions courts approve from the reversals they strike.
03
Pricing a Substantive Change
How each substantive change is weighed against a reopened deposition, delayed summary judgment, and cross-examination before a jury, including the exposure of counsel-deponent errata communications in a reopened session.
04
Pleading the Strike
How to plead a motion to strike under the restrictive, discretionary, and permissive circuit standards of Hambleton, Thorn, EBC, Podell, and Gonzalez, and what strike motions actually produce in the record.
05
Shifting Reopening Costs
How a narrowed motion to reopen, keyed to the number and type of changes, places the costs of reopening on the changing party under Lugtig v. Thomas.
06
Valuing the Changed Answer
How amended Fed. R. Evid. 801(d)(1)(A) changes the value of a changed answer by witness status after December 1, 2026, and when keeping both versions in the record beats a strike under the three-way response decision tree.

Program schedule

clock 12:00 pm - 1:00 pm EST

Deciding What to Change on a Federal Deposition Errata Sheet Within Thirty Days

This session walks federal civil litigators through the defending lawyer’s 30-day errata decision in a side-neutral hour. It runs from the on-record review request and Day 0 of the clock through sorting changes by what they do to the testimony, drafting reason lines, and pricing each substantive change in reopening, summary judgment timing, and cross-examination. It closes with how the December 1, 2026 amendment to Fed. R. Evid. 801(d)(1)(A) affects former employees, third-party fact witnesses, and treating physicians.

Alfred J. Rufty, IIIAlfred J. Rufty, III
clock 1:10 pm - 2:10 pm EST

Answering an Adverse Errata Sheet by Striking, Reopening, or Keeping Both Versions

This side-neutral session, built for examining counsel in either chair, covers answering an adverse errata sheet in federal civil litigation. The hour covers the Rule 30(e) audit, pleading the strike to the circuit’s standard, a narrowed reopen motion that shifts costs to the changing party, and when a non-party’s changed answer is worth more in the record after amended Rule 801(d)(1)(A) takes effect December 1, 2026, drawing on recent strike and reopen rulings, the costs courts have shifted, and how both versions play before a jury.

Christopher MacchiaroliChristopher Macchiaroli
Christopher Macchiaroli

Christopher Macchiaroli

Silverman Thompson

Alfred J. Rufty, III

Alfred J. Rufty, III

Jones Walker LLP

Christopher Macchiaroli

Christopher Macchiaroli

Silverman Thompson

Christopher Macchiaroli is a partner in the Washington, D.C. office of Silverman Thompson. His writing includes “Rewriting the Record: A Federal Court Split on the Scope of Permissible Changes to a Deposition Transcript,” published in the Federal Courts Law Review (2009). An experienced litigator and trial attorney, he handles all facets of civil litigation and criminal defense in state and federal courts in the District of Columbia, Maryland, Virginia, and New York, and has tried more than 50 cases to verdict, 28 of them jury trials, including eight in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

Education & Credentials

Mr. Macchiaroli earned his J.D. from Washington University School of Law in 2003, where he received the Judge John W. Calhoun Award for Trial Advocacy, and his B.A. from Boston University in 2000. He is admitted in Maryland, the District of Columbia, New York, and Virginia, and before the U.S. Supreme Court; the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the Second, Third, Fourth, Seventh, and Federal Circuits; and the U.S. District Courts for the District of Maryland, the District of Columbia, the Eastern and Western Districts of Virginia, the Eastern, Northern, Southern, and Western Districts of New York, and the Northern and Southern Districts of Illinois.

Recognition & Leadership

Mr. Macchiaroli has authored more than 30 appellate briefs in the D.C. Circuit, the Second Circuit, and the District of Columbia Court of Appeals, and his work has resulted in numerous published decisions and news articles. He is a frequent legal commentator who has been interviewed by The Washington Post and CNN, among many other news sources, with appearances that include CNN Tonight on the Roger Stone prosecution (2020) and commentary in The Hill and The Washington Post on the Capitol riot investigations (2021). His other publications include "Refining the Contours of General Jurisdiction Over Foreign Corporations" (Hofstra Journal of International Business & Law, 2012), "To Speak or Not to Speak: Can Pre-Miranda Silence Be Used as Substantive Evidence of Guilt?" (The Champion, 2009), and "Two Decades After Asahi, Questions Remain" (Bloomberg Law Reports, 2009).

Professional Involvement

Mr. Macchiaroli is a member of the Assistant United States Attorneys Association of the District of Columbia and the Women's Bar Association of the District of Columbia, and serves as counsel under the Fraternal Order of Police Legal Defense Plan. He is appointed as Criminal Justice Act counsel in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

Experience

Mr. Macchiaroli spent more than ten years as an Assistant United States Attorney, first in the Civil Division of the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida (2009–2012), where he represented the United States in all aspects of defensive and affirmative civil litigation, and then in the Criminal Section of the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Columbia (2012–2019), where he tried violent crime and large-scale multi-defendant conspiracy cases. He has participated in more than 100 criminal and civil evidentiary hearings in the U.S. District Courts for the District of Columbia, the Southern District of New York, and the Southern District of Florida and in the District of Columbia Superior Court. At Silverman Thompson he represents individual and corporate clients in commercial civil litigation and employment disputes, in grand jury and regulatory investigations, and in criminal prosecutions in federal court in Washington, D.C., Maryland, and Virginia, and has represented witnesses before Congressional hearings. Before joining the Department of Justice he practiced at White & Case LLP in New York and Washington, D.C., handling civil and white-collar matters including internal investigations. His civil results include a temporary restraining order in Vertex Telecom, Inc. v. XO Communications, Inc. (E.D. Va.) barring a defendant from disrupting service to 1.2 million customers and a six-figure settlement with reinstatement of employment in Hunter v. District of Columbia (D.D.C.).
Alfred J. Rufty, III

Alfred J. Rufty, III

Jones Walker LLP

Alfred J. Rufty, III is a partner in the New Orleans office of Jones Walker LLP, where he practices on the firm’s maritime litigation, arbitration, and dispute resolution team. He regularly litigates matters and presents cases before judges and juries in federal and state courts, and brings significant trial experience to that work. Over roughly three decades he has represented vessel owners and operators, offshore service companies, marine insurers, shipyards, cargo owners, and other industry participants, including domestic and foreign companies active on the U.S. Gulf Coast and in Mexico.

Education & Credentials

Mr. Rufty earned his J.D. from Tulane University Law School in 1989, where he served on the Tulane Law Review, and his B.A. from Tulane University in 1986. He is admitted to practice in Louisiana and before the U.S. Supreme Court, the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the Fifth and Eleventh Circuits, and the U.S. District Courts for the Eastern, Middle, and Western Districts of Louisiana.

Recognition & Leadership

Mr. Rufty is listed in The Best Lawyers in America for Admiralty and Maritime Law (2027) and in The Legal 500 United States for Transport – Shipping: Litigation and Regulation (2023), and holds Martindale-Hubbell's AV Preeminent peer review rating. He has been quoted in national legal and business publications, including Law360.

Professional Involvement

Mr. Rufty is a member of the Maritime Law Association of the United States and the Mariners' Club of the Port of New Orleans. His recent presentations include "Admiralty Law Perspective on Compliance" at the Marine Compliance Alliance 2025 Workshop, "How to Protect Your Company in Your Contracts" at Marine Log Ship Repair USA (2025), and "Pitfalls in Vessel Construction and Repair Contract" at the Marine Log Ship Repair USA Conference and Expo (2024), all in New Orleans.

Experience

In federal court, Mr. Rufty won a negligent misrepresentation claim against a marine classification society on behalf of a shipowner, a result the Fifth Circuit upheld on appeal, and won a wrongful attachment claim against a major oilfield contractor that had seized a client's equipment, which the Eleventh Circuit upheld. He persuaded the Texas Supreme Court to reverse the lower courts and dismiss injury and wrongful death claims brought by 102 vessel passengers and survivors after an offshore vessel fire, and defeated an oil company's contractual indemnity claim in a pipeline explosion case by establishing that the maintenance agreement was a "construction contract" barred from risk-shifting under a Louisiana statute. His practice covers maritime casualties, including collisions, allisions, personal injury, property damage, and cargo loss, and contract disputes over charters, shipyard repairs, and marine insurance coverage. He has deep experience with the Jones Act, the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act, and other federal maritime laws, advises on vessel purchases and sales, and is among a small group of lawyers advising international treasure hunters on shipwreck identification and recovery.
Christopher Macchiaroli

Christopher Macchiaroli

Silverman Thompson

Christopher Macchiaroli is a partner in the Washington, D.C. office of Silverman Thompson. His writing includes “Rewriting the Record: A Federal Court Split on the Scope of Permissible Changes to a Deposition Transcript,” published in the Federal Courts Law Review (2009). An experienced litigator and trial attorney, he handles all facets of civil litigation and criminal defense in state and federal courts in the District of Columbia, Maryland, Virginia, and New York, and has tried more than 50 cases to verdict, 28 of them jury trials, including eight in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

Education & Credentials

Mr. Macchiaroli earned his J.D. from Washington University School of Law in 2003, where he received the Judge John W. Calhoun Award for Trial Advocacy, and his B.A. from Boston University in 2000. He is admitted in Maryland, the District of Columbia, New York, and Virginia, and before the U.S. Supreme Court; the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the Second, Third, Fourth, Seventh, and Federal Circuits; and the U.S. District Courts for the District of Maryland, the District of Columbia, the Eastern and Western Districts of Virginia, the Eastern, Northern, Southern, and Western Districts of New York, and the Northern and Southern Districts of Illinois.

Recognition & Leadership

Mr. Macchiaroli has authored more than 30 appellate briefs in the D.C. Circuit, the Second Circuit, and the District of Columbia Court of Appeals, and his work has resulted in numerous published decisions and news articles. He is a frequent legal commentator who has been interviewed by The Washington Post and CNN, among many other news sources, with appearances that include CNN Tonight on the Roger Stone prosecution (2020) and commentary in The Hill and The Washington Post on the Capitol riot investigations (2021). His other publications include "Refining the Contours of General Jurisdiction Over Foreign Corporations" (Hofstra Journal of International Business & Law, 2012), "To Speak or Not to Speak: Can Pre-Miranda Silence Be Used as Substantive Evidence of Guilt?" (The Champion, 2009), and "Two Decades After Asahi, Questions Remain" (Bloomberg Law Reports, 2009).

Professional Involvement

Mr. Macchiaroli is a member of the Assistant United States Attorneys Association of the District of Columbia and the Women's Bar Association of the District of Columbia, and serves as counsel under the Fraternal Order of Police Legal Defense Plan. He is appointed as Criminal Justice Act counsel in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

Experience

Mr. Macchiaroli spent more than ten years as an Assistant United States Attorney, first in the Civil Division of the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida (2009–2012), where he represented the United States in all aspects of defensive and affirmative civil litigation, and then in the Criminal Section of the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Columbia (2012–2019), where he tried violent crime and large-scale multi-defendant conspiracy cases. He has participated in more than 100 criminal and civil evidentiary hearings in the U.S. District Courts for the District of Columbia, the Southern District of New York, and the Southern District of Florida and in the District of Columbia Superior Court. At Silverman Thompson he represents individual and corporate clients in commercial civil litigation and employment disputes, in grand jury and regulatory investigations, and in criminal prosecutions in federal court in Washington, D.C., Maryland, and Virginia, and has represented witnesses before Congressional hearings. Before joining the Department of Justice he practiced at White & Case LLP in New York and Washington, D.C., handling civil and white-collar matters including internal investigations. His civil results include a temporary restraining order in Vertex Telecom, Inc. v. XO Communications, Inc. (E.D. Va.) barring a defendant from disrupting service to 1.2 million customers and a six-figure settlement with reinstatement of employment in Hunter v. District of Columbia (D.D.C.).
Alfred J. Rufty, III

Alfred J. Rufty, III

Jones Walker LLP

Alfred J. Rufty, III is a partner in the New Orleans office of Jones Walker LLP, where he practices on the firm’s maritime litigation, arbitration, and dispute resolution team. He regularly litigates matters and presents cases before judges and juries in federal and state courts, and brings significant trial experience to that work. Over roughly three decades he has represented vessel owners and operators, offshore service companies, marine insurers, shipyards, cargo owners, and other industry participants, including domestic and foreign companies active on the U.S. Gulf Coast and in Mexico.

Education & Credentials

Mr. Rufty earned his J.D. from Tulane University Law School in 1989, where he served on the Tulane Law Review, and his B.A. from Tulane University in 1986. He is admitted to practice in Louisiana and before the U.S. Supreme Court, the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the Fifth and Eleventh Circuits, and the U.S. District Courts for the Eastern, Middle, and Western Districts of Louisiana.

Recognition & Leadership

Mr. Rufty is listed in The Best Lawyers in America for Admiralty and Maritime Law (2027) and in The Legal 500 United States for Transport – Shipping: Litigation and Regulation (2023), and holds Martindale-Hubbell's AV Preeminent peer review rating. He has been quoted in national legal and business publications, including Law360.

Professional Involvement

Mr. Rufty is a member of the Maritime Law Association of the United States and the Mariners' Club of the Port of New Orleans. His recent presentations include "Admiralty Law Perspective on Compliance" at the Marine Compliance Alliance 2025 Workshop, "How to Protect Your Company in Your Contracts" at Marine Log Ship Repair USA (2025), and "Pitfalls in Vessel Construction and Repair Contract" at the Marine Log Ship Repair USA Conference and Expo (2024), all in New Orleans.

Experience

In federal court, Mr. Rufty won a negligent misrepresentation claim against a marine classification society on behalf of a shipowner, a result the Fifth Circuit upheld on appeal, and won a wrongful attachment claim against a major oilfield contractor that had seized a client's equipment, which the Eleventh Circuit upheld. He persuaded the Texas Supreme Court to reverse the lower courts and dismiss injury and wrongful death claims brought by 102 vessel passengers and survivors after an offshore vessel fire, and defeated an oil company's contractual indemnity claim in a pipeline explosion case by establishing that the maintenance agreement was a "construction contract" barred from risk-shifting under a Louisiana statute. His practice covers maritime casualties, including collisions, allisions, personal injury, property damage, and cargo loss, and contract disputes over charters, shipyard repairs, and marine insurance coverage. He has deep experience with the Jones Act, the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act, and other federal maritime laws, advises on vessel purchases and sales, and is among a small group of lawyers advising international treasure hunters on shipwreck identification and recovery.

Credits by state

AK2.0
AL2.0
AR2.0
AZ2.0
CA2.0
CO2.0
CT2.0
DC2.0
DE2.0
FL2.0
GA2.0
HI2.0
IA2.0
ID2.0
IL2.0
IN2.0
KS2.0
KY2.0
LA2.0
MA2.0
MD2.0
ME2.0
MI2.0
MN2.0
MO2.4
MS2.0
MT2.0
NC2.0
ND2.0
NE2.0
NH120.0
NJ2.0
NM2.0
NV2.0
NY2.0
OH2.0
OK2.5
OR2.0
PA2.0
RI2.5
SC2.0
SD2.0
TN2.0
TX2.0
UT2.0
VA2.0
VT2.0
WA2.0
WI2.0
WV2.4
WY2.0

Upcoming Live Online CLE Broadcasts

1000+

Live stream programs

24/7

Access to live webinars & recordings

70,000+

Trusted by Legal Professionals

1000+

Live stream programs

24/7

Access to live webinars & recordings

70,000+

Trusted by Legal Professionals

1000+

Live stream programs

24/7

Access to live webinars & recordings

10,000+

Trusted by Legal Professionals

1000+

Live stream programs

24/7

Access to live webinars & recordings

70,000+

Trusted by Legal Professionals

MCLE Credits

Alabama
Pending
Alaska
Approved
Arizona
Approved
Arkansas
Approved
California
Approved
Colorado
Pending
Connecticut
Approved
Delaware
Pending
District of Columbia
No Required
Florida
Approved
Georgia
Pending
Hawaii
Approved
Idaho
Pending
Illinois
Pending
Indiana
Pending
Iowa
Pending
Kansas
Pending
Kentucky
Pending
Louisiana
Pending
Maine
Pending
Maryland
No Required
Massachusetts
No Required
Michigan
No Required
Minnesota
Pending
Mississippi
Pending
Missouri
Approved
Montana
Pending
Nebraska
Pending
Nevada
Pending
New Hampshire
Approved
New Jersey
Approved
New Mexico
Approved
New York
Approved
North Carolina
Pending
North Dakota
Approved
Ohio
Pending
Oklahoma
Pending
Oregon
Pending
Pennsylvania
Approved
Rhode Island
Pending
South Carolina
Pending
South Dakota
No Required
Tennessee
Pending
Texas
Approved
Utah
Pending
Vermont
Approved
Virginia
Not Eligible
Washington
Approved
West Virginia
Pending
Wisconsin
Pending
Wyoming
Pending

Alabama

Requirements

The Alabama State Bar MCLE Commission requires attorneys to complete 12 credits, including 1 ethics, by December 31 of each year. All credits must be reported by February 15 of the following year. A maximum of 12 credits, including 1 ethics credit, may be carried over for 1 year only.  

Formats

  • Attorneys can earn unlimited “live” credit through live seminars, live webcasts, and co-sponsored locations with MyLAWCLE-Alabama approved programs
  • Attorneys are limited to 6 credits per compliance period of “online” programs through MyLAwCLE On-Demand programs