Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Ziegler v. Salazar

United States District Court, D. South Dakota, Southern Division

October 9, 2014

VICTOR R. ZIEGLER, SR., Plaintiff,
v.
KEN SALAZAR, Secretary, Department of Interior; PAT RAGSDALE, Gov. Official; and CARL RENVILLE, Gov. Official, Defendants.

ORDER

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 ยง 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.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.