(specially concurring).
In specially concurring, Permann is referred to for the scope of review on deposi*69tions. As that subject is totally untreated in Permann, I defer to my recitation on this subject in Lawler v. Windmill Restaurant, 435 N.W.2d 708, 711-7 (S.D.1989), which aspect of my writing was approved by three members of this Court. Accord with my writing: Wold v. Meilman Food Industries, Inc., 269 N.W.2d 112, 115 n. 2 (S.D.1978).