Rule 80.Stenographic Report or Transcript

Rule 80 has two subsections here where the civil rule has four; the civil provisions on District Court stenographers and sound recording devices are not carried. Both surviving subsections are headed "Courts Other Than District Court".

Using a transcript at a later trial

Where the testimony of a witness at a trial or hearing was officially stenographically reported, and that testimony is admissible in evidence at a later trial, it may be proved by the transcript, duly certified by the person who reported the testimony.

Two conditions do the work. The earlier testimony must have been officially reported — not merely recorded by someone. And admissibility is assumed, not conferred: the rule supplies a method of proof for testimony that is already admissible, which is a question for the law of evidence and, where the witness is unavailable, for Rule 32.

The record on appeal

Subsection (b) removes a step that used to be required. A transcript duly certified by the person officially reporting the testimony shall be considered part of the record on appeal, and the trial court need not appoint that person a commissioner to report the evidence.

Read this alongside the rules that depend on a stenographer being present. Rule 52(a) conditions findings on written motion on a stenographer requested under Rule 202 or an electronic recording; Rule 43(c) requires evidence to be taken and reported in full on request where a stenographer has been appointed; Rule 46 removes the need for formal exceptions where a stenographer is present or a recording is made; and Rule 53(h)(3) bars review of a question of law dependent on evidence before a master unless it was recorded by a stenographer.