Some procedural rules you're just not aware of until you get burned. CPLR 3116 is such a rule. This rule basically states that if you don't produce proof that you forwarded a deposition transcript to the deponent for signing, the transcripts are not admissible evidence and can not support your summary judgment motion. And since it takes at least 60 days to elapse if the deponent decides not to alter testimony, you can easily run afoul of your 120-day deadline if you disregard this rule.
I remember now that I did not forward a non-party EBT transcript to a neonatologist for signature. And I'm using that transcript in support of a cross-motion for summary judgment. Now a loophole exists to admit such unsigned testimony as an admission against the deponent; however I'm using it in my case as evidence of the neonatologist's employee status at a hospital. Can I argue that his testimony serves as an admission against the hospital as his ostensible principle?