The biggest factor is almost always costs. Depositions can run into the thousands, and that doesn't include attorney fees. Other factors include time and, if the witness is definitely friendly to a party (i.e. the testimony is favorable and predictable), a deposition is probably unnecessary.
A complaint is not supposed to state the amount of punitive damages sought (if you state an amount, it's subject to a motion to strike).
Also, it seems you're attempting to bring claims for breach of contract and fraud -- however, punitive damages are not available for breach of contract. You will have to establish fraud.
Anyone named as cross-defendant who is NOT already a party to the action must be personally served with a summons on the cross-complaint, along with the cross-complaint itself (the same procedure as with a complaint). Parties already existing in the lawsuit are simply served with the cross-complaint (mail is fine).
From your question, it seems you've filed a cross-complaint against the plaintiff who sued you (who's clearly already in the action), so no summons is necessary.
In my personal opinion it's sloppy and unprofessional, but it happens a lot. It's technically a violation of the rules of court, but, in all likelihood, not much will come of it. The biggest issue is that down the road when parties or the court need to cite to a line number. If it bothers you, ask your attorney to fix it.
The time runs from the date of service of the notice of ruling (time is extended further for mail service), unless notice was waived in open court, which apparently didn't happen here. I would remind defense counsel.
This is a good example of why fighting some things in litigation is not worth the time and cost (and why consultation with an attorney can be worthwhile). You should focus on the merits (or lack thereof) of the lawsuit against you.