Deposition transcript v. errata sheet

Last reviewed: September 2026. the discussion of Pollina, contradictory corrections and CPLR 3116(a) has been clarified. Originally published May 24, 2012.

An errata sheet records a witness’s corrections to a deposition transcript. In New York, CPLR 3116(a) permits changes in form or substance, with reasons. Contradictory changes can be challenged.

The 60-day period runs from submission to the witness for examination. The deposition must be signed before an officer authorized to administer an oath; the statute does not limit that role to a notary.

Key Takeaways

• CPLR 3116(a) is the controlling rule in New York. Changes must be entered at the end of the deposition with a written reason for each one, and the transcript must then be signed before an officer authorized to administer an oath.
• The witness has 60 days from when the transcript is submitted to sign and return it. If the deadline lapses, the transcript may be used as fully as if signed.
• Distinguish a transcription error from a substantive change to an answer. Explain the actual reason for either; a contradictory change may be challenged.
• Under the New York “sham affidavit” / contradictory-testimony line of cases, courts treat post-deposition errata-sheet edits skeptically when they appear designed to manufacture a fact issue and defeat summary judgment.
• In Pollina, the conflict raised a credibility issue on that record. A contradictory errata sheet does not automatically defeat summary judgment.
• The errata sheet does not replace the transcript. The original transcript remains the official record; the errata sheet is appended to it as the witness’s permitted corrections, and both are available to opposing counsel.

Still current (September 2026): CPLR 3116(a) still gives the witness 60 days from submission of the transcript to sign it and return it with any changes and the reasons for them; the decision discussed here is read against that text. For today’s deposition practice see preparing for a car accident deposition (EBT) in New York.

What is an errata sheet?

An errata sheet is a written list of corrections a deposition witness submits after reviewing the transcript of their testimony. The word “errata” comes from the Latin errata — meaning “errors” — and the legal use of the term traces back to the same publishing tradition that produced the errata page in printed books.

The witness testifies under oath while a court reporter records the testimony. The transcript is then submitted for review. Corrections and reasons go at the end; the witness signs before an officer authorized to administer an oath.

Errata sheets are part of the regular discovery workflow in New York personal injury litigation, no-fault actions, employment cases, and commercial litigation. They are not optional add-ons — the right and the procedure are built into the CPLR.

CPLR 3116(a) — the New York rule

CPLR 3116(a) governs the signing of a New York deposition transcript. The rule provides that:

• The deposition shall be submitted to the witness for examination and shall be read to or by the witness.
• Any changes in form or substance that the witness desires to make shall be entered at the end of the deposition, accompanied by a statement of the reasons the witness gives for making them.
• The deposition shall then be signed by the witness before any officer authorized to administer an oath (a notary, in practice).
• If the witness fails to sign and return the deposition within 60 days of submission, the deposition may be used as fully as though it had been signed.

A few practical points flow directly from the text of the statute:

• The 60-day window runs from when the transcript is submitted to the witness for review, not from the date of the deposition itself.
• The errata sheet must include the witness’s stated reason for each change. A bare list of edits with no explanation is procedurally defective and gives the other side an immediate target.
• The deposition must be signed before an officer authorized to administer an oath, which includes a notary. Follow the statute’s signing requirement, not just an unsigned list of edits.
• If the witness does not sign and return the deposition within 60 days, it may be used as fully as if signed. That does not dispense with other rules governing its use or admissibility.

For background on the broader civil-procedure framework, see our legal encyclopedia, which catalogs the CPLR rules that govern New York discovery practice.

What changes can a witness make on an errata sheet?

The text of CPLR 3116(a) allows changes “in form or substance,” which on its face is broad. In practice, courts and litigators sort errata-sheet changes into three categories.

1. Typographical and transcription fixes. Misspelled names, transposed numbers or a misheard answer may need correction. For example, changing “Route 109” to “Route 110” because the reporter misheard the answer corrects the record of what was said.

2. Clarifying changes. A witness may seek to explain an ambiguous answer. Calling an edit a clarification does not settle whether the court will accept it; the substance of the change and the explanation matter.

3. Substantive changes that contradict prior testimony. The witness testified one way at the deposition and now wants the record to say something else. This is where errata-sheet practice gets contested. Courts in New York and elsewhere routinely scrutinize substantive contradictions, especially when:

• The change appears to respond to a pending or anticipated summary judgment motion.
• The change reverses a damaging admission.
• The change has no plausible explanation other than litigation strategy.

The original answer does not disappear when a witness submits a correction. An unexplained reversal can lead to a motion to strike the change or a credibility challenge, subject to the rules governing use of the testimony.

Can errata-sheet changes be used to avoid summary judgment?

Sometimes, but not automatically. The court considers the correction, its explanation and the rest of the record. The result in Pollina should not be read as permission to manufacture a factual dispute by changing an answer.

In Pollina v Oakland’s Rest., Inc., 2012 NY Slip Op 03991 (2d Dept. 2012), the Second Department held:

“[T]he conflict between the plaintiff’s original deposition testimony and the correction sheet ‘raises an issue of credibility which may not be resolved on a motion for summary judgment’” (quoting Williams v O & Y Concord 60 Broad St. Co., 304 AD2d 570, 571; see Breco Envtl. Contrs., Inc. v Town of Smithtown, 31 AD3d 359, 360; Surdo v Albany Collision Supply, Inc., 8 AD3d 655).

Pollina involved a greasy landing. The plaintiff offered evidence that another patron had slipped there one to two hours earlier and notified a restaurant employee. That evidence raised an issue about notice of the condition.

The court also treated the conflict between the transcript and correction sheet as a credibility issue. It affirmed denial of the restaurant’s motion; it did not hold that every contradictory correction guarantees a trial.

Compare Yefet’s errata-sheet and missing-handrail evidence. There, the correction and an engineer’s affidavit together supported a factual dispute about causation.

The limits matter. In Torres v Board of Education, the Second Department struck significant contradictory changes whose explanations were inadequate. Labels such as “misspoke” did not suffice on that record.

For a separate discovery issue, see summary judgment while disclosure remains outstanding. An errata dispute and a request for more discovery require different support.

Deposition transcript vs. errata sheet — what’s the difference?

These are two different documents that serve two different functions in the same proceeding.

• The deposition transcript is the verbatim record of what was said at the deposition, prepared by a court reporter. It includes every question, every answer, all objections, and any colloquy. It is the official record of the testimony.
• The errata sheet lists the witness’s changes and reasons. CPLR 3116(a) requires the deposition to be signed before an officer authorized to administer an oath.

The errata sheet does not replace the transcript. The transcript stays in the file as originally prepared by the reporter. The errata sheet is appended to it. Both documents are produced together, and opposing counsel sees both.

The original answer and correction may support a credibility challenge. Their use at trial remains subject to the court’s evidentiary rulings; neither document becomes automatically admissible merely because both exist.

Practical guidance — reviewing your transcript and signing the errata sheet

For witnesses going through this process for the first time, the procedure is straightforward but the stakes are real. A few practical points:

• Read the transcript carefully and within the 60-day window. The clock starts when the transcript is submitted, not when you happen to open the envelope.
• Mark transcription errors as you go. Spelling of names, place names, dates, numbers — anything where the reporter could plausibly have misheard.
• State the real reason for the change. Identify whether it corrects transcription, clarifies an answer or changes substantive testimony. Do not assume that saying “I misspoke” makes a contradiction acceptable.
• Explain each change specifically. A label such as “misstatement” or “to clarify” is not a guarantee of acceptance, particularly for a significant contradiction. Torres illustrates that limit.
• Follow the signing requirement. CPLR 3116(a) requires signing before an officer authorized to administer an oath, such as a notary.
• Talk to your lawyer before signing. This is especially important if any change is substantive or relates to liability, damages, or a known disputed fact in the case.

In a personal injury case, review the transcript with counsel before making corrections that affect disputed facts. The original answer and the proposed change may both matter on a motion or at trial.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is an errata sheet in a deposition?

An errata sheet lists the witness’s changes to a deposition transcript and the reasons for them. CPLR 3116(a) permits changes in form or substance and requires signing before an officer authorized to administer an oath.

How long do I have to submit an errata sheet in New York?

The 60 days run from submission to the witness for examination, not from the deposition date. CPLR 3116(a) allows use as if signed when the witness fails to sign and return the deposition within that period.

Can I change my deposition testimony with an errata sheet?

CPLR 3116(a) permits changes in form or substance, with reasons. Significant contradictions can be challenged and struck when the explanation is inadequate, as Torres shows. The original testimony does not disappear.

What happens if I don’t return the errata sheet?

CPLR 3116(a) permits the deposition to be used as if signed after the 60-day period. It also states that the witness may not make changes after that period. Refusing to sign does not erase the testimony.

Can the other side use my errata sheet against me?

A change may be used to challenge credibility, subject to the rules governing use of the testimony and the court’s rulings. Keep the original transcript, the correction sheet and the stated reasons together.

Is the errata sheet part of the official deposition transcript?

The changes and reasons belong at the end of the deposition under CPLR 3116(a). They do not erase the original answers. Whether and how the transcript and corrections may be used depends on the applicable rules and the court’s rulings.

Talk to a Long Island attorney about your deposition or errata sheet

Discuss the 60-day period promptly with counsel, particularly when a proposed change concerns liability or damages in a personal injury case. For broader procedural background, see our legal encyclopedia.

Request a Free Case Review to discuss a deposition or errata-sheet dispute and any approaching deadline.

Connect to the Encyclopedia

• Topic hub: Summary Judgment (CPLR 3212)
• NY EBT Venue Rules: When Courts Grant Undue Hardship Exceptions for Depositions
• Appellate Term holds CPLR 3212(f) relief is inappropriate under three separate circumstances
• The failure of an assignor to appear for an EBT is not a basis for a 3126 sanction against the assignee
• Remote Depositions for International Parties: Legal Precedent from Long Island and NYC Courts
• Legal Encyclopedia
• What to Expect at Your Car Accident Deposition in New York (2025)
• EBT Transcript Invalid Because It Was Not Mailed to Plaintiff (CPLR 3116)