Are recordings of videoconferences admissible in court?
Posted by YOM Staff
What are admissible videoconference recordings in court?
Are recordings of videoconferences admissible in court in lieu of a video recording made by a videographer?
You can arrange for recording of a videoconference and may be able to use it to preserve testimony if you plan ahead. Videoconference recordings are not identical to video recordings made by a legal videographer. First, a videoconference recording will capture the exact sound and image from the conference, including any static or lags and delays that cause testimony to appear disjointed. Second, a recording of a videoconference is not made with the formal procedures outlined by Civil Rule 30(b)(8). For these reasons, a recording of a videoconference is unlikely to be admitted in court without a stipulation or court order.
But parties can plan ahead and save time and costs using videoconference technology. Before a deposition is taken by videoconference, the parties should stipulate in writing to the use of a videoconference, Civil Rule 30(b)(4), or get the Court's permission to conduct the deposition via videoconference. Civil Rule 30(b)(7). Any stipulation should include an agreement designating "the person before whom the deposition shall be taken [and] the manner of recording, preserving and filing the deposition." Civil Rule 30(b)(4). As you make these arrangements, particularly if you are videoconferencing with a witness who is out-of-state or out of the country, remember to check the rules or reach agreement about where and by whom the oath will be administered.