§32.4 Comparison with Federal Rule

• Jurisdiction: Washington

§32.4COMPARISON WITH FEDERAL RULE

Although identical to its federal counterpart in most respects, CR 32 contains a few key differences. The Washington rule provides that a deposition can be used when the witness "resides out of the county and more than 20 miles from the place of trial ...." CR 32(a)(3)(B). The federal rule, by contrast, allows use of a deposition when the witness, by residence or otherwise, "is more than 100 miles from the place of hearing or trial or is outside the United States ...." Fed. R. Civ. P. 32(a)(4)(B). In defining the geographical limits for admitting depositions of "unavailable" witnesses, both the federal and state rules refer to a distance from "the place of trial." See CR 32(a)(3)(B); Fed. R. Civ. P. 32(a)(4)(B). Neither rule specifically defines what is meant by "the place of trial," although federal courts have tended to define the "place of trial" as the courthouse and not the district boundary. See, e.g., Tatman v. Collins, 938 F.2d 509, 511 (4th Cir. 1991); Mazloum v. B.C. Metro. Police Dep't, 248 F.R.D. 725 (D.D.C. 2008).

The biggest distinction between CR 32 and its federal counterpart is the provision for out-of-state expert witnesses...