The Auditor-Master or a Special Master may require the deposit of funds sufficient to defray the expenses of a reference, including a stenographic report of the testimony.
Rule 53-II.Deposit for Expenses
Group VI: Trials · Not amended since adoption on record · Last verified July 14, 2026
In one sentenceRule 53-II lets the Auditor-Master or a Special Master require the parties to deposit funds up front to cover the cost of a reference, including a stenographic report of the testimony taken.
Full Text of Rule 53-II
Plain-English Summary
Rule 53-II is a single, direct provision: the Auditor-Master or a Special Master appointed under Rule 53 can require the parties to deposit money sufficient to defray the expenses of a reference, expressly including the cost of a stenographic report of the testimony. In practice, this lets the presiding master ask for funds covering anticipated costs, like a court reporter's fee, before or during the proceeding rather than waiting to sort out who pays after the fact.
Read alongside Rule 53(g)'s compensation provisions and Rule 53-I's fee standard for the Auditor-Master, this deposit requirement is a separate, practical tool: it addresses the operating costs of the reference itself, not the master's own compensation for conducting it, giving the master a way to keep a reference funded as it proceeds.
Frequently Asked Questions
What expenses can a deposit under Rule 53-II cover?
The expenses of the reference generally, with the rule specifically calling out the cost of a stenographic report of the testimony taken before the master.
Who can require this deposit — only the Auditor-Master?
No. Rule 53-II authorizes either the Auditor-Master or a Special Master appointed under Rule 53 to require it.
Is the deposit under Rule 53-II the same thing as the Auditor-Master's fee under Rule 53-I?
No. Rule 53-I addresses the Auditor-Master's own compensation for the service rendered, while Rule 53-II covers the reference's operating expenses, such as a stenographer's charge.
Do I get back any deposited funds that turn out to exceed the reference's actual costs?
Rule 53-II doesn't address that directly. The deposit is meant to defray the expenses incurred, and accounting for any unused portion falls to the presiding master and the court.
When during the case can a master require this deposit?
Rule 53-II sets no specific timing requirement. It authorizes the master to require the deposit as needed to cover the reference's expenses as the proceeding moves forward.
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: auditor master deposit dcstenographer fee deposit dc civilreference expenses deposit dc superior courtspecial master deposit dc rule 53