If a judge or magistrate judge conducting a hearing or trial is unable to proceed, any other judge or magistrate judge (if authorized by law) may proceed upon certifying familiarity with the record and determining that the case may be completed without prejudice to the parties. In a hearing or a nonjury trial, the successor judge or magistrate judge must, at a party’s request, recall any witness whose testimony is material and disputed and who is available to testify again without undue burden. The successor judge or magistrate judge may also recall any other witness.
Rule 63.Judge’s or Magistrate Judge’s Inability to Proceed
Group VII: Judgment · Last amended 2017 · Last verified July 14, 2026
In one sentenceRule 63 lets a different judge or magistrate judge take over a hearing or trial already underway when the one presiding cannot continue, so long as the successor certifies familiarity with the record and finds the case can go forward without prejudice to the parties, recalling disputed witness testimony on request.
Full Text of Rule 63
Comment
This rule is identical to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 63, as amended in 2007, except for the addition of “magistrate judge.”
Plain-English Summary
Trials and hearings do not always finish with the judge who started them. Rule 63 covers what happens when the presiding judge or magistrate judge becomes unable to continue — through illness, reassignment, or any other reason. Another judge or magistrate judge, if authorized by law to step in, may take over, but only after certifying familiarity with the record and deciding the case can be completed without prejudice to the parties. That certification is not a formality; it is the rule's built-in check that a substitution will not shortchange either side.
The rule also protects the value of live testimony. In a hearing or a nonjury trial, the successor judge must, if a party asks, recall any witness whose testimony is both material and disputed and who is available to testify again without undue burden — the new judge does not just read a transcript of contested testimony and rule on it secondhand. The successor may also recall any other witness on their own, beyond what a party requests.
The District's version of this rule tracks the 2007-restyled Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 63 word for word, with one addition: the express reference to a “magistrate judge,” reflecting that Superior Court proceedings, unlike many federal trial courts, regularly involve magistrate judges who may need to pick up a case mid-stream.
Frequently Asked Questions
What happens if the judge presiding over my trial becomes unable to continue partway through?
Rule 63 allows another judge or magistrate judge, if authorized by law to preside, to take over — after certifying familiarity with the record and determining the case can be completed without prejudice to the parties.
Can the successor judge just review the transcript of a disputed witness instead of hearing that witness again?
Not if a party objects to that approach. In a hearing or nonjury trial, Rule 63 requires the successor judge, at a party's request, to recall any witness whose testimony is material and disputed and who can testify again without undue burden.
Does Rule 63's witness-recall requirement apply to jury trials?
The rule's mandatory recall provision is written for a hearing or a nonjury trial. The broader authority for a successor judge to take over applies to hearings and trials generally, but the specific recall right is tied to the nonjury setting.
Can the new judge call back a witness even if no party asked?
Yes. Rule 63 also allows the successor judge to recall any other witness on their own initiative, beyond what a party requested.
Why does DC's Rule 63 mention magistrate judges when the federal rule does not?
The 2017 comment explains that DC's rule is identical to the 2007-amended Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 63 except for adding "magistrate judge," reflecting the Superior Court's use of magistrate judges in proceedings that may need a substitute presiding officer.
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 judge unable to continue trialsuccessor judge recall witness dc superior courtmagistrate judge takes over trial dcwhat happens if judge cannot finish a case dc