Rule 32.Using depositions in court proceedings
Group V: Disclosures and Discovery · Last amended March 1, 2019 · Last verified July 14, 2026
Full Text of Rule 32
Notes
Drafter’s Note, Amendment Effective January 1, 2005: The rule is amended to conform to the federal rule, with one significant exception. The last paragraph of subdivision (a)(3) of the federal rule, concerning deposition without leave of court or with insufficient notice, is not included in the Nevada rule. Former subdivision (c), which addressed impeaching one’s own witness, is repealed as outdated. The provision was deleted from the federal rule in 1972. New subdivision (c) conforms to the 1993 amendment to the federal rule. It complements the amendments to Rule 30 that authorize nonstenographic methods of recording depositions.
Advisory Committee Note — 2019 Amendment: The amendments generally conform Rule 32 to FRCP 32. Rules 32(a)(5)(A) and (B)(i) are incorporated from the federal rule. Rule 32(a)(5)(B) is modified from the federal rule and gives the court the discretion to allow a transcript to be used against a party proceeding pro se. In general, a party representing himself or herself does not need the protection of Rule 32(a)(5)(B)(i) because the party does not need time to obtain an attorney. If a party initially attempts to obtain an attorney, but eventually proceeds pro se, then the protection of Rule 32(a)(5)(B)(i) may be warranted. If a deposition is recorded by audio or audiovisual means and is later transcribed, any dispute regarding the accuracy of the transcription or of multiple competing transcriptions should be resolved by the court or discovery commissioner.
Amendment History
Amended eff. 9-27-71; Amended 12-13-85, eff. 2-11-86; Amended eff. 1-1-05; Amended eff. 3-1-19.
Plain-English Summary
A deposition is testimony taken before trial, under oath, with a court reporter or recorder present. Rule 32 answers a question that only comes up later: once you have that transcript or recording in hand, when can you use it in front of the judge or jury? The basic requirement is fairness. The party against whom the deposition is offered had to have been there, represented, or given reasonable notice, and the testimony has to be the kind Nevada evidence law would let in if the witness were on the stand live. Beyond that baseline, the rule sorts uses into categories: any party can use a deposition to catch a witness contradicting an earlier statement, an opponent can use a party's own deposition testimony against that party for any purpose, and anyone can use the deposition of a witness who is truly unavailable — dead, too far away, too sick, or beyond the reach of a subpoena — as a stand-in for live testimony. A court can also allow a deposition's use in rarer circumstances where justice calls for it, even though live testimony is still the preferred way to prove a case.
The rule also protects a party who did not get a fair shot at the deposition itself. Testimony taken on short notice cannot be used against a party who promptly asked for a protective order and was still waiting on a ruling when the deposition went forward. And a deposition taken without a lawyer present, because the witness was unavailable and the deposing party used the no-leave procedure for that situation, cannot be used against a party who tried hard but failed to line up counsel in time.
The last piece of Rule 32 is about waiver — losing the right to object. Some objections have to be raised immediately, during the deposition, or they disappear: complaints about how a question was phrased, the manner of the examination, or an irregularity that could have been fixed on the spot if someone had spoken up. Other objections survive even if nobody said anything at the time, because they go to whether the testimony is the kind of evidence a court should hear at all — objections to a witness's competence or to the relevance of the testimony can wait until trial. Getting this distinction right matters: raise the wrong kind of objection too late, and a court may treat you as having accepted testimony you meant to fight.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can I read my opponent's deposition testimony to the jury at trial?
Yes. Rule 32(a)(3) lets an adverse party use the deposition of a party — or of that party's officer, director, managing agent, or Rule 30(b)(6) designee — for any purpose, including as part of the case-in-chief, not just to catch the witness in a contradiction.
What makes a witness "unavailable" for purposes of using a deposition instead of live testimony?
Rule 32(a)(4) lists the recognized grounds: the witness has died, is more than 100 miles from the courthouse or out of state (unless the offering party caused that absence), cannot attend because of age, illness, infirmity, or imprisonment, or could not be reached with a subpoena. A court can also allow use of the deposition in exceptional circumstances after a motion and notice, even outside those categories.
If I only want to read part of a deposition into evidence, can my opponent add more?
Yes. Rule 32(a)(6) lets an adverse party require you to introduce any other part of the deposition that, in fairness, belongs alongside the part you offered, and any party may introduce additional parts on its own.
I did not object during the deposition — have I lost my right to object at trial?
It depends on the type of objection. Objections to the competence of the witness or the relevance of the testimony survive even without a contemporaneous objection, unless the problem could have been fixed at the time. But objections to the form of a question, the manner of the examination, or similar correctable irregularities are waived if not raised promptly during the deposition.
Can I use a deposition taken in an earlier lawsuit in my current case?
Rule 32(a)(8) allows it when the earlier deposition was lawfully taken (and filed, if that was required) in a case involving the same subject matter and the same parties or their successors. The deposition can be used to the same extent as if it had been taken in the current action.