43.01 Form In all trials the testimony of witnesses shall be taken orally in open court, unless otherwise provided by statute or by these rules, the Minnesota Rules of Evidence, or other rules adopted by the Supreme Court. 43.02. 43.03.
Rule 43.Taking of Testimony
Last amended January 1, 1997 · Last verified July 1, 2026
In one sentenceRule 43 sets the basic ground rule that witnesses testify out loud in open court instead of by written statement, while allowing affirmations instead of oaths, affidavits for certain motions, and court-appointed interpreters when needed.
Full Text of Rule 43
43.04 Affirmation in Lieu of Oath Whenever under these rules an oath is required to be taken, a solemn affirmation may be accepted in lieu thereof.
43.05 Evidence and Motions Whenever a motion is based on facts not appearing of record, the court may hear the matter on affidavits presented by the respective parties, but the court may direct that the matter be heard wholly or partly on oral testimony or depositions. 43.06.
43.07 Interpreters The court may appoint an interpreter of its own selection and may fix reasonable compensation. The compensation shall be paid out of funds provided by law.
Advisory Committee Comments
Advisory Committee Comment—2006 Amendment
Rule 43.07 is amended to conform the rule to the statutory requirement that the “fees and expenses of a qualified per diem interpreter for a court must be paid by the state courts.” Minn. Stat. § 546.44, subd. 3 (2004). Language is stricken from the second sentence to eliminate the conflict between the rule and statute regarding payment of court- appointed interpreters. This amendment is drawn from the language of Minn. R. Crim. P. 26.03, subd. 16.
Amendment History
- (Amended effective January 1, 1997.)
- (Abrogated effective January 1, 1997.)
- (Abrogated effective January 1, 1997.)
- (Abrogated effective January 1, 1997.)
Plain-English Summary
Rule 43 covers a handful of practical points about how testimony and evidence come into a civil trial. The central rule is this: witnesses testify orally, in open court, in front of the judge (and jury, if there is one). This is not a formality. Live testimony lets the judge and jury watch how a witness answers questions, and it lets the other side cross-examine on the spot. The rule allows exceptions only when a statute, another civil procedure rule, the Minnesota Rules of Evidence, or another Supreme Court rule says otherwise.
The rule also relaxes one old formality: a witness does not have to swear a religious oath. A solemn affirmation works as well. This matters for witnesses whose beliefs do not permit oath-taking, or who prefer a secular promise to tell the truth.
For certain motions, Rule 43 offers a shortcut. When a motion depends on facts that are not already part of the court record, the judge does not have to hold a full evidentiary hearing. The court can decide the motion based on affidavits submitted by the parties. But the judge is not locked into that approach. If live testimony or depositions would help sort out disputed facts, the court can order the matter heard that way instead, in whole or in part.
Finally, the rule confirms that courts can appoint interpreters. The judge selects the interpreter and sets reasonable compensation, which is paid from public funds. Several parts of the original rule (43.02, 43.03, and 43.06) were abrogated years ago and no longer contain any text; what remains is the oral-testimony requirement, the affirmation option, the affidavit procedure for motions, and the interpreter provision.
Frequently Asked Questions
Do I have to swear a religious oath to testify in a Minnesota civil trial?
No. Rule 43.04 allows a witness to make a solemn affirmation instead of swearing an oath. Either one satisfies the rule.
Can a judge decide a motion by reading written statements instead of hearing witnesses?
Yes, when the motion turns on facts not already in the record. Rule 43.05 allows the court to rule based on affidavits from the parties. The court can still choose to hear oral testimony or depositions instead, or in addition, if that would help resolve the dispute.
Why does testimony generally have to be given in open court instead of submitted in writing?
Rule 43.01 requires oral testimony in open court unless a statute, another civil procedure rule, the Minnesota Rules of Evidence, or another Supreme Court rule provides otherwise. Live testimony allows real-time cross-examination and lets the fact-finder assess the witness directly.
Who pays for a court-appointed interpreter, and can either party pick who it is?
The court selects the interpreter and sets reasonable compensation under Rule 43.07, and that compensation is paid from funds provided by law, not billed directly to a party by the rule itself.
What happened to Rules 43.02, 43.03, and 43.06? Did they get renumbered somewhere else?
They were abrogated effective January 1, 1997, and no longer contain substantive content. They are not restated elsewhere in Rule 43.
Source & verification. The rule text and Advisory Committee Comments are reproduced verbatim from the
official Minnesota Rules of Civil Procedure (Minn. R. Civ. P. 43). Prescribed by the Supreme Court of Minnesota (Minn. Stat. § 480.051). The plain-English summary is original and written by us. Last verified July 1, 2026. ·
Official source
Also known as: oral testimony rule MinnesotaMinnesota court interpreter rule
Advisory Committee Comments--1996 Amendments
The changes to this rule conforms it to its federal counterpart. The existing rule predates the adoption of the Minnesota Rules of Evidence, and creates conflicts with those rules in practice. It is appropriate to have all provisions relating to evidence contained in a single location, and to have the rules of civil procedure only refer to those rules where necessary.