Rule 16.Interpreters
Part I. General Administration · Last amended January 1, 2019 · Last verified September 4, 2026
Full Text of Rule 16
Rule History
Added Aug. 30, 2018, effective Jan. 1, 2019.
Plain-English Summary
Rule 16 is one sentence and grants three things: the court may appoint an interpreter of its choosing, may set the interpreter's reasonable compensation, and that compensation is paid as provided by law.
Each part matters. "Of its choosing" means the appointment is the court's, not a party's nomination to be approved — a party who brings an interpreter has not thereby appointed one. "Reasonable compensation" is fixed by the court rather than negotiated. And the payment question is sent outward to statute and administrative provision rather than answered here, so the rule does not itself allocate the cost between the parties or to the county.
The rule is silent on when an interpreter must be appointed. It grants a power rather than creating an entitlement, and the circumstances in which one is required come from other law.
Related provisions sit nearby in the ruleset. Rule 8 allows a party or witness to appear or testify telephonically, which includes video, and an interpreter may be needed in that setting as much as in the courtroom. Rule 20 governs the form of documents but says nothing about the language they are filed in.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can the court appoint an interpreter?
Rule 16 provides that the court may appoint an interpreter of its choosing and may set the interpreter's reasonable compensation, to be paid as provided by law.
Who chooses the interpreter?
The court. Rule 16 refers to an interpreter of the court's choosing.
Who pays for the interpreter?
Rule 16 provides that the compensation is to be paid as provided by law, and does not itself allocate the cost.
Does the rule say when an interpreter must be appointed?
No. Rule 16 grants the court a power; it does not state the circumstances in which an interpreter is required.