From: Plaintiff, 2026 March
Maintaining authority as a woman when opposing counsel tests boundaries in a deposition
Litigation is adversarial by nature. Depositions, an inherent part of litigation, are no exception. Depositions, a central forum for advocacy, are not designed to be comfortable. But there is a meaningful distinction between sharp advocacy and unnecessary hostility.
Most litigators, particularly women litigators, encounter moments in their careers when opposing counsel tests boundaries. The interruptions come quickly. Speaking objections stretch longer than necessary. Tone shifts. Sometimes the assumptions surface immediately, being mistaken for second chair, having questions “clarified” before they are answered, or being told what you “really mean” to ask.
The testing is rarely explicit. But it is there. The question is not whether it happens. The question is how you respond.
Over time, I have learned that authority in a deposition is not established by matching intensity. It is established by maintaining control: of the record, of the pace, and of yourself.
Authority is built
The strongest depositions are built long before the court reporter swore in the witness. When you know the record, have your outline mapped out, your exhibits tabbed, and a sense of the objections coming, you don’t have to react to every provocation. You just keep going.
Preparation eliminates hesitation. And hesitation is often what boundary-testing opposing counsel is looking to exploit.
Interruptions are a strategy
Repeated interruptions are rarely accidental. They are tactical. They attempt to unsettle. They are designed to see whether you will lose your place or your composure.
Escalation is tempting. But escalation shifts focus away from the record.
A calm response is often more effective: “Counsel, unless you are instructing the witness not to answer, I’m entitled to complete my question.”
Then continue. No added commentary. No raised voice. Just continuation.
The objective is not to win the exchange. The objective is to maintain the structure of your examination. It may be securing agreement on the rules of the road at the outset or locking in foundational safety procedures.
When you stay disciplined, you protect the sequence of your questioning. You prevent unnecessary detours. You signal, to the witness and to opposing counsel, that the deposition will proceed on your terms.
The transcript will ultimately reflect who maintained control and who strayed from the issues.
Navigating tone in the deposition
Women litigators are expected to operate within a narrower margin of acceptable tone. Directness can be labeled “aggressive.” Restraint can be labeled “inexperienced.” It is a familiar tension. The solution is not to adopt someone else’s style. It is to refine your own. Clear, concise questions. Measured delivery. Strategic silence.
These tools do not depend on personality. They depend on discipline. When you are consistent, direct but measured, firm but professional, the labels of “too aggressive” or “too inexperienced” begin to lose their force. Over time, steadiness reshapes perception.
The record is the audience
In contentious depositions, it can feel like the exchange between opposing counsel is the central event. Yet the true audience is the judge reviewing a motion, the jury hearing designated testimony, or the client watching how you handle pressure.
Professionalism under pressure communicates authority to all of them. A clean record is more powerful than a sharp exchange.
Composure as leverage
Civility is sometimes mistaken for passivity. It is not. Composure is leverage. It preserves credibility. It prevents unnecessary side disputes. It keeps the focus on the testimony that matters.
Over time, consistent control shifts the dynamic: Interruptions shorten, tone moderates, and assumptions fade, not because litigation becomes less adversarial, but because authority, once established, builds on itself and allows you to focus on what actually matters: the testimony and the client.
Conclusion
Opposing counsel may interrupt, adopt a sharper tone, or attempt to redirect the energy of the room. None of that requires you to abandon professionalism. Maintaining professionalism under pressure is one of the most effective ways to assert authority. It keeps the focus on the record, on the facts, and on the client.
Our job is to empower the powerless or amplify the voice of those marginalized. That makes how we handle ourselves in tough moments all the more important.
Authority is established by control. And control begins with composure.
