Comment:
The Uniform Interstate Depositions and Discovery Act (the Act) has been adopted as Rule 450 ) of the Idaho Rules of Civil Procedure to enable an attorney prosecuting or defending a lawsuit outside the jurisdiction of Idaho to conduct discovery within Idaho. The rule does not apply to discovery arising out of litigation originating in foreign countries.
The term ‘Subpoena’ includes a subpoena duces tecum. The description of a subpoena is based on the language of Rule 45 of the FRCP.
The term ‘Subpoena’ does not include a subpoena for the inspection of a person (subsection 45(j)(2)(E) (iii) is limited to inspection of premises). Medical examinations in a personal injury case, for example, are separately controlled by state discovery rules (the corresponding State rule is Rule 35 of the IRCP).
The term ‘Court of Record’ was chosen to exclude non-court of record proceedings from the ambit of the rule. A ‘Court of Record’ includes anyone who is authorized to issue a subpoena under the laws of that state, which may include an attorney of record for a party in the proceeding.
Comment:
Submitting a subpoena to the clerk of court in Idaho, so that a subpoena is then issued in the name of Idaho, is the necessary act that invokes the jurisdiction of Idaho, which in turn makes the newly issued subpoena both enforceable and challengeable in Idaho.
The standard procedure under this section will become as follows, using as an example a case filed in Kansas (the trial state) where the witness to be deposed lives in Idaho (the discovery state):
A lawyer of record for a party in the action pending in Kansas will issue a subpoena in Kansas (the same way lawyers in Kansas routinely issue subpoenas in pending actions). The lawyer will then prepare an Idaho subpoena so that it conforms to the requirements of the Idaho Rules of Civil Procedure and may also incorporate the same terms of the Kansas subpoena so long as they conform to the Idaho Rules of Civil Procedure. The lawyer will then hire a process server (or local counsel) in Idaho, who will take the completed and executed Kansas subpoena and the completed but not yet executed Idaho subpoena to the clerk’s office in Idaho. In addition, the lawyer might prepare a short transmittal letter to accompany the Kansas subpoena, advising the clerk that an Idaho subpoena is being sought pursuant to Idaho Rule 45(j)(3). The clerk of court, upon being given the Kansas subpoena, will then issue the Idaho subpoena (‘issue’ includes signing and stamping). The process server (or other agent of the party) will then serve the Idaho subpoena on the deponent in accordance with Idaho law (which includes any applicable local rules).
The act of the clerk of court is ministerial, yet is sufficient to invoke the jurisdiction of Idaho over the deponent. The only documents that need to be presented to the clerk of court in Idaho are the subpoena issued in the trial state and the draft subpoena of Idaho. There is no requirement to hire local counsel to have the subpoena issued in Idaho, and there is no need to present the matter to a judge in Idaho before the subpoena can be issued. However, the rule requires that the Idaho subpoena ‘conform to the requirements of the Idaho Rules of Civil Procedure, including Rule 45, and conform substantially to the form provided in Rule 45(c)….” In effect, the clerk of court in Idaho issues the new subpoena which is then served on the deponent in accordance with the laws of Idaho. The process is simple and efficient, costs are kept to a minimum, and local counsel and judicial participation are unnecessary to have the subpoena issued and served in Idaho. The rule requires that, when the subpoena is served, it contain or be accompanied by the names, addresses, and telephone numbers of all counsel of record and of any party not represented by counsel. This requirement imposes no significant burden on the lawyer obtaining the subpoena, given that the lawyer already has the obligation to send a notice of deposition to every counsel of record and any unrepresented parties. The benefits to Idaho, by contrast, are substantial. This requirement makes it easy for the deponent (or, as will frequently be the case, the deponent’s lawyer) to learn the names of and contact the other lawyers in the case. This requirement can easily be met, since the subpoena will contain or be accompanied by the names, addresses, and telephone numbers of all counsel of record and of any party not represented by counsel (which is the same information that will ordinarily be contained on a notice of deposition and proof of service).
Comment:
The Idaho court clerk will not create a file when discovery is initiated nor collect a fee. This rule places the obligation of retaining the original subpoena and the proof of service on the lawyer initiating the discovery. A file will be created if a motion is brought to enforce, quash, or modify the subpoena.
Comment:
The rule requires that any application to the court for a protective order, or to enforce, quash, or modify a subpoena, or for any other dispute relating to discovery under this rule, must comply with the law of Idaho. Those laws include Idaho’s procedural, evidentiary, and conflict of laws rules. Idaho has a significant interest in protecting its residents who become non-party witnesses in an action pending in a foreign jurisdiction from any unreasonable or unduly burdensome discovery requests, and this is easily accomplished by requiring that any discovery motions must be decided under the laws of Idaho. This protects the deponent by requiring that all applications to the court that directly affect the deponent must be made in Idaho.
I.R.C.P. 45