Rule 358.Court Interpreters
Last amended November 22, 2023 · Last verified July 1, 2026
Full Text of Rule 358
Advisory Committee Comments
Advisory Committee Comment – 2023 Amendments
Rules 358.01-.02 are modified in 2023 to adopt terminology that is consistent with Minn. Stat. § 546.42.
Amendment History
- (Amended effective November 22, 2023.)
Plain-English Summary
Rule 358 leaves no discretion once the trigger is met: if a party or a witness in the expedited process is disabled in communication, the child support magistrate must appoint a qualified interpreter. This is not a request the person has to make persuasively; the rule uses "shall," and the appointment follows the same procedure used for interpreters throughout the district courts generally.
What counts as disabled in communication is broader than it might sound. It reaches a hearing, speech, or other communication disorder, but it also reaches someone who has enough trouble speaking or understanding English that they cannot follow what is happening at the hearing, or, if that person is a party, cannot obtain due process of law without an interpreter's help.
The practical effect is that a language or communication barrier should never be the reason a party loses a child support case or a witness cannot testify. Once a magistrate recognizes that a person fits this definition, appointing an interpreter is not optional, and the case proceeds only after that need has been addressed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is a child support magistrate required to appoint an interpreter, or is it discretionary?
It is required. Rule 358 states that the magistrate shall appoint a qualified interpreter whenever a party or witness in the case is disabled in communication.
Does Rule 358 only cover hearing or speech disabilities?
No. It also covers someone who has enough difficulty speaking or understanding English to be unable to follow the proceeding, or, when that person is a party, to obtain due process without an interpreter's help.
Who can raise the need for an interpreter in an expedited child support hearing?
Either a party or a witness can be the person who needs an interpreter, and once a magistrate recognizes that need, the appointment follows automatically rather than waiting on a formal motion.
Does the same interpreter appointment process apply as in other district court cases?
Yes. Rule 358 directs that interpreters be appointed according to the same procedure used for interpreter appointments throughout the district courts generally, rather than a separate expedited-process-only process.
What happens if a party's communication disability is not recognized before a hearing?
Because the appointment duty is mandatory rather than discretionary, a magistrate who becomes aware that a party or witness is disabled in communication must address it by appointing an interpreter before proceeding further.
Advisory Committee Comment
Rules 358.01 and 358.02 are based upon the provisions of Minn. Stat. §§ 546.42 and 546.43 (2000) which set forth the types of proceedings in which qualified interpreters must be appointed.