09-C-972 Parkland Venture, LLC, v. The City of Muskego

Listen to this article

Civil Procedure
Deposition transcripts; availability

A court reporter is not required under FRCP 30(e)(1) to provide each witness a copy of his transcript.

“Under the current rule, the word ‘submitted’ is not used. Instead, the operative language in the current rule involves notifying the deponent that the transcript is ‘available’ for reviewing. In my opinion, if the word ‘submitted’ under the prior rule did not require the deponent to be provided a copy for review outside the offices of the court reporter, the current rule’s language likewise does not. Indeed, making something ‘available’ connotes taking less affirmative action on the part of the court reporter than does the word ‘submit.’ Thus, I find that the court reporter in this action has complied with Rule 30(e)(1) by requesting that the deponents come to her office to review the transcripts of their depositions.”

“Further, it makes sense for the court reporter to require such action on the part of the deponents.

Maintaining the original transcript in her office and not sending copies protects the court reporter’s entitlement to ‘reasonable charges’ for providing a copy of the transcript ‘to any party or the deponent,’ pursuant to Rule 30(f)(3).”

“Moreover, the defendants do not have any obligation to pay for the deponents to receive a copy of their deposition transcripts. If the witnesses want to purchase a copy from the court reporter, they may do so.”

09-C-972 Parkland Venture, LLC, v. The City of Muskego

E.D.Wis., Callhan, Mag. J.