From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Harvey v. Means

United States District Court, Western District of Washington
Jan 24, 2024
2:23-cv-1712 (W.D. Wash. Jan. 24, 2024)

Opinion

2:23-cv-1712

01-24-2024

DALE HARVEY, Petitioner, v. GARANN ROSE MEANS, Respondent.


MINUTE ORDER

The following Minute Order is made by direction of the Court, the Honorable Jamal N. Whitehead, United States District Judge:

On January 24, 2024, Respondent Garann Rose Means sent an email to Courtroom Deputy, Grant Cogswell, requesting that her witnesses be allowed to appear remotely via Zoom at the evidentiary hearing on Friday, January 26, 2024. The Court has already granted Harvey's motion to allow his witnesses in Scotland to testify remotely. See Dkt. No. 51.

Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 43(a), “witnesses' testimony must be taken in open court” but “[f]or good cause . . . the court may permit testimony in open court by contemporaneous transmission from a different location.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 43(a). Here, the Court finds good cause to allow Means's witnesses to testify remotely given the expedited nature of the proceedings. Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Means's request for virtual testimony.


Summaries of

Harvey v. Means

United States District Court, Western District of Washington
Jan 24, 2024
2:23-cv-1712 (W.D. Wash. Jan. 24, 2024)
Case details for

Harvey v. Means

Case Details

Full title:DALE HARVEY, Petitioner, v. GARANN ROSE MEANS, Respondent.

Court:United States District Court, Western District of Washington

Date published: Jan 24, 2024

Citations

2:23-cv-1712 (W.D. Wash. Jan. 24, 2024)