This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.
Subscribe to the Daily Journal for access to Daily Appellate Reports, Verdicts, Judicial Profiles and more...

9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals,
Civil Procedure

Aug. 23, 2023

Ninth Circuit’s plain text ruling on Rule 45 won’t be the last word

In re Kirkland: the location of the proceeding - not the person - still matters for Rule 45 compliance in our post-pandemic world.

Paul Werner

Partner
SheppardMullin

See more...

Imad Matini

Associate
SheppardMullin

See more...

Kathryn Ryan

Associate
SheppardMullin

See more...

Before the COVID-19 pandemic, there was not much ambiguity in how to interpret Rule 45's "Place of Compliance" rule, which restricts a federal court's power to compel a witness to testify at a hearing or trial more than 100 miles from the proceeding. But with the proliferation of video-conference capabilities, and parties' and courts' increased reliance on them to conduct routine matters efficiently, some courts have given the requirement a more flexible and practical...

To continue reading, please subscribe.
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!

Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)

Already a subscriber?

Enewsletter Sign-up