During my deposition, opposing counsel keeps objecting to almost every question — does that stop me from answering, and do I lose the right to raise an objection about the deposition process later if I don't say it out loud right then?

The officer's core duties

The officer before whom the deposition is taken must put the witness under oath and record the testimony, either personally or through someone acting under the officer's direction and in the officer's presence. The testimony must be taken stenographically unless the parties agree otherwise. These duties fall on the officer regardless of whether any objections are raised during the examination — administering the oath and ensuring an accurate record happen independently of, and are not suspended by, the back-and-forth over objections that Section 17 separately addresses.

What gets objected to, and how it's handled

Objections during the deposition can go to the officer's own qualifications, the manner of taking the deposition, the evidence presented, the conduct of any party, or any other aspect of the proceedings. Rather than being argued out and ruled on in the moment, all such objections are simply 'noted by the officer upon the deposition' for later resolution. The officer's role here is essentially clerical rather than adjudicative: the officer records that an objection was made and on what basis, but does not decide whether the objection is well taken. That determination is left for whoever later rules on the admissibility of the deposition testimony, typically the trial court.

Testimony proceeds despite objection

The key operative line is that evidence objected to 'shall be taken subject to the objections' — meaning the deposition continues and the witness answers, with the objection preserved on the record rather than blocking the question. The ruling on whether the objection has merit comes later, typically when the deposition is offered or used. This design keeps depositions moving efficiently, since disputes over the admissibility of particular questions or answers do not have to be resolved on the spot by an officer who, unlike a judge, is not necessarily positioned to rule on evidentiary objections in real time.

The written-interrogatory alternative

Instead of personally participating in the oral examination, a party served with notice of the deposition may transmit written interrogatories to the officer, who then propounds them to the witness and records the answers verbatim — an alternative way to take part without appearing at the examination itself. The same objection framework carries over to this alternative: objections to the interrogatories or to the answers given are likewise noted rather than resolved on the spot, preserving the same subject-to-objection structure regardless of which method — oral examination or written interrogatories — a party uses to take part in the deposition.

Related provisions

• Rule 23, Section 17 — Record of examination; oath; objections
• Rule 23, Section 26 — Officers to take responses and prepare record