Rule 31.Depositions of Witnesses Upon Written Questions
Last amended July 1, 2018 · Last verified July 1, 2026
Full Text of Rule 31
Advisory Committee Comments
Advisory Committee Comments--1996 Amendments
This change conforms the rule to its federal counterpart. The federal rule was amended in 1993 to create a more usable mechanism for exchanging questions and submitting them to the witness. One goal of this change is to make depositions on written questions a more useful discovery device, recognizing that if it can be used effectively it has good potential for reducing the cost of litigation. The amendment of this rule also serves the goal of facilitating the handling of these depositions by court reporters and others not regularly exposed to Minnesota practice.
Amendment History
- (Amended effective July 1, 2018.)
- (Amended effective January 1, 1997.)
Plain-English Summary
Not every deposition needs a lawyer in the room asking questions out loud. Rule 31 offers a paper version: one party writes out questions ahead of time and sends them to an officer, who then puts those questions to the witness under oath and records the answers. This route is used less often than an oral deposition, but it exists for situations where a live examination is not practical or necessary.
A party generally does not need court permission to take a deposition this way. The two exceptions are a witness who is confined in prison, and a witness who has already been deposed once in the case, unless the parties agree in writing to a second round. The notice starts the process, naming the witness and the officer who will administer the questions, and then a clock starts running for the other side to respond. Other parties have 14 days to send cross questions, then the original party has 7 days to send redirect questions, and after that the other side has another 7 days to send recross questions. A court can shorten or lengthen these windows for good reason.
Once the written questions are settled, the officer conducts the session much like an oral deposition: the witness answers under oath, the officer records the testimony, and the officer then certifies and files or mails the completed deposition. The party who arranged it must let everyone else know once the deposition comes back from the officer.
Written-question depositions trade the flexibility of live follow-up for a lower-cost, less time-consuming process, which makes them a practical option for less central witnesses or when cost matters more than nuance.
Frequently Asked Questions
Do I need the court’s permission to depose someone with written questions?
Usually not. You only need leave of court if the witness is in prison, or if that witness has already been deposed once in the case and the parties have not agreed in writing to depose them again.
How is this different from asking someone written interrogatories?
A deposition on written questions still results in sworn, recorded testimony taken by an officer, and it allows other parties to add their own cross, redirect, and recross questions on a set schedule, which is closer to how an oral deposition unfolds than to a simple written questionnaire.
How much time do the other parties get to add their own questions?
After the original questions are served, other parties have 14 days to serve cross questions. The party who noticed the deposition then has 7 days to serve redirect questions, and after that the other parties have 7 more days to serve recross questions. A court can adjust these deadlines for cause.
Can a company or government agency be deposed this way?
Yes. Organizations can be deposed on written questions using the same designation procedure used for oral depositions, where the organization names the person or people who will testify on its behalf.
What happens after the officer takes the witness’s answers?
The officer prepares, certifies, and either files or mails the completed deposition, following the same procedures used for oral depositions. The party who took the deposition must promptly notify the other parties once it comes back.
Advisory Committee Comment—2018 Amendments
Rule 31.01(a) is amended to correct the cross-reference to paragraph 2(b) of the rule. Rule 31.01(b) is similarly amended only to correct the cross-reference to the correct paragraph of Rule 26.02. These amendments are not intended to change the operation or interpretation of either rule.