We're talking about 30(b)(6) depositions or their state-court equivalents. As a plaintiffs' lawyer, I've always taken the position (usually in Illinois state-court cases) that these do provide a "second bite at the apple." In other words, if I serve a notice for a corporate-rep deposition, and XXX Corp. makes Mr. Squirrely available to testify about my list of topics, I figure I can still depose Mr. Squirrely at a later date as an individual witness.
Defense counsel sometimes complains about this, but I've never had anyone go so far as to file a motion. So after a bit of belly-aching, Mr. Squirrely gets produced a second time.
Anyone interested in this issue should see the article "Organizational Depositions: Do They Allow a Second Bite at the Apple?" by David Markowitz, reprinted at the website of Markowitz Herbold PC. According to the Markowitz, the second-bite issue "has increasingly been raised in federal litigation under Rule 30(b)(6)." Markowitz then surveys the state of the law.
For still more on 30(b)(6) depositions, see these various sources on the web: "Practice Tips and Developments in Handling 30(b)(6) Depositions," by Michael R. Gordon; "Using 30(b)(6) Depositions to Bind Corporations," by C. King and Evan Sauda; and "The Scope of Rule 30(b)(6) Depositions," by Kevin C. Baltz.
Related posts on The Trial Practice Tips Blog: