(a) EXAMINING WITNESSES; ADDRESSING COURT. Except by permission of the court, only one attorney for each party may examine a witness or address the court on a question arising in a trial.
Rule 39-II.Number of Counsel
Group VI: Trials · Last amended 2017 · Last verified July 14, 2026
In one sentenceRule 39-II limits each party to one attorney examining a witness or addressing the court on a given question during trial, absent the court's permission, while allowing two attorneys per side to address the court or jury during final arguments.
Full Text of Rule 39-II
(b) FINAL ARGUMENTS. With the court’s approval, 2 attorneys for each party may address the court or jury in final arguments on the facts.
Comment
Stylistic changes were made to this rule to conform with the 2007 amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
This rule should be liberally construed and flexibly applied where representation is being provided by law students accompanied by supervising attorneys.
Plain-English Summary
Rule 39-II keeps trial proceedings orderly by controlling who speaks. Under Rule 39-II(a), only one attorney per party may examine a given witness or address the court on a question that comes up during trial, unless the court grants permission for more. This prevents a team of lawyers from tag-teaming a single witness or argument and keeps the record clear about who is responsible for what.
Closing arguments get a bit more room. Rule 39-II(b) allows two attorneys per party to address the court or jury in final arguments on the facts, but only with the court's approval. The distinction reflects the different rhythms of a trial: witness examination benefits from one consistent voice managing the back-and-forth, while closing argument can accommodate a shared presentation between two lawyers if the court agrees.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can more than one attorney for my side question the same witness at trial in D.C. Superior Court?
Not without the court's permission. Rule 39-II(a) limits examination of a witness, or addressing the court on a question arising at trial, to one attorney per party unless the court allows otherwise.
How many attorneys can give closing arguments for each side?
Up to two attorneys per party may address the court or jury in final arguments on the facts, but Rule 39-II(b) requires the court's approval first.
Does Rule 39-II apply to addressing the court on legal questions during trial, or just to witness examination?
Both. Rule 39-II(a) covers an attorney examining a witness and also covers addressing the court on a question that arises during trial, limiting each to one attorney per party absent the court's permission.
Why does D.C. Superior Court limit examination to one attorney per party?
The rule's purpose is to keep trial proceedings orderly by ensuring one identifiable attorney handles a given witness or issue, rather than allowing multiple lawyers on the same side to divide up a single examination.
Does this rule apply differently when law students are handling the case under supervision?
The rule's official Comment notes it should be applied flexibly where a law student is representing a party alongside a supervising attorney, though the rule text itself sets the same one-attorney default that applies generally.
Source & verification. Rule text and official Comments are
reproduced verbatim from the District of Columbia Superior Court Rules of Civil
Procedure, adopted by the Superior Court of the District of Columbia. Last verified July 14, 2026.
· Official source
Also known as: dc one attorney per witness rulehow many lawyers can examine a witness dc superior courtfinal argument two attorneys dc civil rulesnumber of counsel dc superior court