United States District Court, D. South Dakota, Southern Division
October 9, 2014
VICTOR R. ZIEGLER, SR., Plaintiff,
KEN SALAZAR, Secretary, Department of Interior; PAT RAGSDALE, Gov. Official; and CARL RENVILLE, Gov. Official, Defendants.
LAWRENCE L. PIERSOL, District Judge.
Court staff received a request that the Defendants be allowed to present the testimony of a witness by video from a remote location, Colorado. The witness in question is an Administrative Law Judge who adjudicated on a case of Plaintiff Ziegler.
The proper way to approach such a request is to file a Motion with the Court but in the interest of time the Court is answering the question. The parties are referred to Rule 43(a) which provides in part: "For good cause in compelling circumstances and with appropriate safeguards, the court may permit testimony in open court by contemporaneous transmission from a different location." No such showing has been made and the request at this point is denied. See also Parkhurst v. Belt, 567 F.3d 995 (8th Cir. 2009); and 9A Federal Practice and Procedure, Civil § 2414, (3d ed.).
If the parties stipulated to the video testimony, then testimony could be presented in that manner. In addition, if the parties take a deposition before trial the testimony could be presented in that manner.
IT IS SO ORDERED.