Group V: Depositions and Discovery · Last amended January 1, 2018 · Last verified July 14, 2026
In one sentenceRule 32 sets out when and how a deposition already taken may be used at trial or a hearing in place of live testimony, and which objections are lost if not raised in time.
(a)Use of Depositions. At the trial or upon the hearing of a motion or an interlocutory proceeding, any part or all of a deposition, so far as admissible under the rules of evidence applied as though the witness were then present and testifying, may be used against any party who was present or represented at the taking of the deposition or who had due notice thereof, in accordance with any of the following provisions:
(1)Any deposition may be used by any party for the purpose of contradicting or impeaching the testimony of deponent as a witness or for any other purpose permitted by the Vermont Rules of Evidence.
(2)The deposition of a party or of anyone who at the time of taking the deposition was an officer, director, or managing agent, or a person designated under Rule 30(b)(6) or 31(a) to testify on behalf of a public or private corporation, partnership or association or governmental agency which is a party may be used by an adverse party for any purpose.
(3)The deposition of a witness, whether or not a party, may be used by any party for any purpose if the court finds that the witness (A) is exempted by ruling of the court on the ground of privilege from testifying concerning the subject matter of the deposition; or (B) persists in refusing to testify concerning the subject matter of the deposition despite an order of the court to do so; or (C) testifies to a lack of memory of the subject matter of the deposition; or (D) is unable to be present at the hearing because of death or then existing physical or mental illness or infirmity; or (E) is absent from the hearing and the proponent of the deposition has been unable to procure the witness’ attendance by process or other reasonable means. A deponent is not unavailable as a witness if the exemption, refusal, claim of lack of memory, inability, or absence is due to the procurement or wrongdoing of the proponent of the deposition for the purpose of preventing the witness from attending or testifying.
(4)If only part of a deposition is offered in evidence by a party, an adverse party may require the offeror to introduce any other part which ought in fairness to be considered with the part introduced, and any party may introduce any other parts.
Substitution of parties pursuant to Rule 25 does not affect the right to use depositions previously taken; and, when an action has been brought in any court of the United States or of any state and another action involving the same subject matter is afterward brought between the same parties or their representatives or successors in interest, all depositions lawfully taken and duly filed in the former action may be used in the latter as if originally taken therefor. A deposition previously taken may also be used as permitted by the Vermont Rules of Evidence.
(b)Objections to Admissibility. Subject to the provisions of Rule 28(b) and subdivision (d)(3) of this rule, objection may be made at the trial or hearing to receiving in evidence any deposition or part thereof for any reason which would require the exclusion of the evidence if the witness were then present and testifying.
(c)Form of Presentation. Except as otherwise directed by the court, a party offering deposition testimony pursuant to this rule may offer it in stenographic or nonstenographic form, but, if in nonstenographic form, the party shall also provide the court with a transcript of the portions so offered. On request of any party in a case tried before a jury, deposition testimony offered other than for impeachment purposes shall be presented in nonstenographic form, if available, unless the court for good cause orders otherwise.
(d)Effect of Errors and Irregularities in Depositions.
(1)As to Notice. All errors and irregularities in the notice for taking a deposition are waived unless written objection is promptly served upon the party giving the notice.
(2)As to Disqualification of Officer. Objection to taking a deposition because of disqualification of the officer before whom it is to be taken is waived unless made before the taking of the deposition begins or as soon thereafter as the disqualification becomes known or could be discovered with reasonable diligence.
(3)As to Taking of Deposition.
(A)Objections to the competency of a witness or to the competency, relevancy, or materiality of testimony are not waived by failure to make them before or during the taking of the deposition, unless the ground of the objection is one which might have been obviated or removed if presented at that time.
(B)Errors and irregularities occurring at the oral examination in the manner of taking the deposition, in the form of the questions or answers, in the oath or affirmation, or in the conduct of parties, and errors of any kind which might be obviated, removed, or cured if promptly presented, are waived unless seasonable objection thereto is made at the taking of the deposition.
(C)Objections to the form of written questions submitted under Rule 31 are waived unless served in writing upon the party propounding them within the time allowed for serving the succeeding cross or other questions and within 7 days after service of the last questions authorized.
(4)As to Completion and Return of Deposition. Errors and irregularities in the manner in which the testimony is transcribed or the deposition is prepared, signed, certified, sealed, indorsed, transmitted, filed, or otherwise dealt with by the officer under Rules 30 and 31 are waived unless a motion to suppress the deposition or some part thereof is made with reasonable promptness after such defect is, or with due diligence might have been, ascertained.
Notes
Reporter’s Notes—2018 Amendment: Rule 32(d)(3)(C) is amended to extend its 5-day time period to 7 days consistent with the simultaneous “day is a day” amendments to V.R.C.P. 6.
Reporter’s Notes—1996 Amendment: Rule 32(c) is taken from the 1993 amendment adding Federal Rule 32(c). It replaces subdivision (c) abrogated in 1983. The provision is necessary in light of the increased use of nonstenographic recording and the elimination of the requirement that a deposition be filed by simultaneous amendment of Rule 5(d). If a deposition is presented in nonstenographic form, a transcript must be given to the court. The rule also provides that an available nonstenographic recording must be used in a jury trial at any party’s request except when the deposition is used for impeachment.
Reporter’s Notes—1983 Amendment: Rule 32(a)(1) is amended to broaden the use of a deposition where authorized by the Vermont Rules of Evidence. For example, Evidence Rule 801(d) permits a prior inconsistent statement of a witness in a deposition to be used as substantive evidence. The amendment to Rule 32(a)(4) has a similar purpose. For example, Evidence Rule 804(b)(1) provides that the deposition of an unavailable witness can be used against a party in a prior proceeding who had an opportunity and similar motive to develop the witness’ testimony. Rule 32(a)(3) is amended to prevent a potential inconsistency with the provisions of Evidence Rule 804(a) defining “unavailability” of a witness for purposes of certain hearsay exceptions, including former testimony. See Reporter’s Notes to that rule. See also Evidence Rule 804(b)(1). The language of the amendment is virtually identical to that of Evidence Rule 804(a) and to that of the comparable provision of present Criminal Rule 15(g). Rule 32(c) is abrogated because it is superseded by various provisions of the Rules of Evidence. In particular, Evidence Rule 607 provides that any party may impeach any witness thus eliminating the notion of proprietorship of a witness on which the present rule was based.
Reporter’s Notes—1982 Amendment: Rule 32(a) is amended as part of the series of amendments to the discovery rules following the recent amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. See Reporter’s Notes—1982 Amendments to Rule 26. The former language allowed depositions taken in one action to be used in another only when the first action was “dismissed.” There was no good reason for this limitation and it was often ignored. See Wright & Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure: Civil § 2150 (1971). By this amendment, it is eliminated.
Reporter’s Notes: This rule is in part similar to 12 V.S.A. §§ 1234- 1236 (now superseded). Those statutes were based upon former Federal Rules 26(d)-(f), which were incorporated in 1970 with insignificant changes as Rules 32(a)-(c). Rule 32(d), which was former Federal Rule 32, had no equivalent in prior Vermont law. Rule 32(a) carries forward most of 12 V.S.A. § 1234, with the following principal exceptions: (1) The first sentence of the subdivision provides that depositions are to be tested under the rules of evidence “applied as though the witness were then present and testifying,” to make clear that no technical hearsay objections based on the deponent’s absence from court will lie. (2) The provision of 12 V.S.A. § 1234(a)(3)(E) permitting use of a deposition where the witness is a member of a cloistered religious community has been omitted from Rule 32(a)(3) because in a proper case such a deposition could come in under the “exceptional circumstances” provision of Rule 32(a)(3)(E). (3) Rule 32(a)(4) substitutes “fairness” for “relevance” as the test for determining what parts of a partially introduced deposition may be required thereafter to be introduced. (4) The last paragraph of the subdivision, like former Federal Rule 26(d), permits use of a deposition taken in a previously dismissed action “in any court of the United States or of any State,” rather than merely in a Vermont court. Note that the federal courts have not found this provision a bar to admission of depositions taken in another action even when the tests of the rule are not met, if the basic evidentiary requirement of full cross-examination in the other action is satisfied. See 8 Wright & Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure § 2150 (1970). Rule 32(b) carries forward 12 V.S.A. § 1235, except that the right to object to introduction of a deposition is expressly made subject to the provisions of Rule 28(b) for flexibility concerning irregularities in depositions taken in foreign countries and of Rule 32(d)(3) concerning irregularities generally. Rule 32(c) is virtually identical to 12 V.S.A. § 1236. Rule 32(d) provides generally for waiver of objections that are either purely technical or might have been obviated if raised at the time that the grounds thereof arose.
Amendment History
Amended Dec. 28, 1981, eff. March 1, 1982; Dec. 28, 1982, eff. April 1, 1983; Feb. 22, 1996, eff. July 1, 1996; Sept. 20, 2017, eff. Jan. 1, 2018.
Plain-English Summary
Rule 32 governs what happens to a deposition after it is taken — specifically, when a party may read it or play it at trial or on a motion instead of putting the witness on the stand. Any deposition may be used to contradict or impeach the deponent's testimony, or for any other purpose the Vermont Rules of Evidence allow. The deposition of a party, or of someone who was an officer, director, managing agent, or an organizational designee under Rule 30(b)(6) or 31(a) for a party, may be used by an adverse party for any purpose, without any separate showing that the deponent is unavailable.
For any other witness, Rule 32 requires the court to find one of several conditions: the deponent is exempted from testifying on the ground of privilege, persists in refusing to testify despite a court order, testifies to a lack of memory, cannot be present because of death or existing illness or infirmity, or is absent and the proponent has been unable to procure attendance by process or other reasonable means. A deponent is not treated as unavailable if the proponent caused the absence to keep the witness from testifying.
A party offering deposition testimony may present it in stenographic or nonstenographic form, but in a jury trial, a party may request that testimony offered for purposes other than impeachment be presented in nonstenographic form if available, unless the court finds good cause otherwise. The rule closes with a set of waiver provisions: objections to the notice, to the officer's disqualification, and to errors in how the deposition was completed and returned are all lost unless raised promptly, while objections to a witness's competency or to the relevancy or materiality of testimony generally survive unless the problem could have been fixed at the time.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can any deposition be used at trial?
Any deposition may be used to contradict or impeach the deponent as a witness, or for any other purpose the Vermont Rules of Evidence allow. Using it as substantive testimony for other purposes against a non-party witness depends on the court finding the witness unavailable in one of the ways the rule lists.
What makes a witness unavailable for deposition use under Rule 32?
The court must find that the witness is exempted from testifying on the ground of privilege, persists in refusing to testify despite a court order, testifies to a lack of memory of the subject matter, cannot be present because of death or existing physical or mental illness, or is absent and the proponent has been unable to procure attendance by process or other reasonable means.
Can a party's own deposition be used against them for any purpose?
Yes. The deposition of a party, or of someone who was an officer, director, managing agent, or Rule 30(b)(6) or 31(a) designee for a party organization at the time of the deposition, may be used by an adverse party for any purpose.
Is nonstenographic deposition testimony preferred at a jury trial?
On request of any party in a case tried before a jury, deposition testimony offered other than for impeachment must be presented in nonstenographic form if available, unless the court finds good cause to order otherwise.
What deposition objections must be raised right away or are waived?
Objections to the notice for taking a deposition, to the disqualification of the officer, and to errors in how the testimony was transcribed, signed, certified, sealed, or otherwise handled by the officer are waived unless raised promptly or with reasonable promptness after the defect is or should have been discovered.
Source & verification. Rule text, official Reporter's Notes, and
amendment history are reproduced verbatim from the Vermont Rules of Civil Procedure,
adopted by the Vermont Supreme Court. Last verified July 14, 2026.
· Official source
Also known as:using depositions at trial vermontdeposition unavailable witnessdeposition objections waiver vermontvrcp 32