Home / Interpreters / Depositions

Interpreters for Depositions

A deposition is testimony under oath, taken down word for word, that can be read back at trial. When the witness does not testify in English, every answer in the transcript is the interpreter's English. Here is what the rules ask of a deposition interpreter, where interpreted depositions go wrong, and how counsel books one with us.

Who arranges the interpreter at a deposition

No court sends an interpreter to a deposition. It happens in a conference room or on a video call, outside the courthouse, and the lawyers arrange everything in it: the court reporter, the room, the exhibits and the interpreter. In practice the lawyer who notices the deposition of a witness who does not testify in English books the interpreter, and opposing counsel sometimes brings a second one to check the first. How the cost is shared is a matter between counsel or for the court; we did not find an official rule assigning it, so we do not state one.

What the rules do settle is the interpreter's role. In federal cases, the examination of a deponent proceeds as it would at trial under the Federal Rules of Evidence (FRCP 30(c)(1)), and FRE 604 requires an interpreter to be qualified and to give an oath or affirmation to make a true translation. The deposition is taken before an officer authorized to administer oaths (FRCP 28(a)) — usually the court reporter — and California's Court Reporters Board tells reporters to swear in the interpreter first, then the witness through the interpreter.

Some states go further. California's Court Reporters Board reads Government Code 68561 as covering depositions, which means a certified or registered court interpreter, and the statute requires that interpreter, where no judge is present, to state on the record their name, certification or registration number and that they showed both parties their credential. If your jurisdiction requires a credential, tell us which one when you request; we confirm whether we can staff it before you book.

What a deposition asks of an interpreter

Deposition interpreting is consecutive and in the first person. Counsel asks, the interpreter renders the question, the witness answers, the interpreter renders the answer as "I" — never "he says". The California board's guidance shows why: when anyone slips into the third person ("ask him how old he is"), the reporter has to take it down as colloquy, and the transcript stops reading as testimony.

Everything is rendered, including false starts, hedges and non-answers, because the record is examined afterwards for exactly those. An interpreter who tidies an answer has changed the evidence. Objections are rendered too, so the witness knows one was made. When the interpreter needs a repetition or a spelling, they say so to counsel on the record, as "the interpreter", so nobody mistakes it for the witness speaking.

Exhibits add a second skill: sight translation, reading an English document aloud in the witness's language, or a foreign-language document aloud in English. Contracts, medical records and text messages read aloud this way take time. A written, certified translation of a foreign-language exhibit is a separate service, and usually the better choice for anything that will be marked and relied on.

Where interpreted depositions go wrong

• A witness who half speaks English. Answering some questions in English and others through the interpreter produces a mixed record; the reporter has to mark which is which, and the English answers are often the weaker ones. Decide before the deposition, on the record, how the witness will testify.
• Side conversations. A long exchange between interpreter and witness followed by a one-word answer is the clearest sign of trouble. The California board says the attorney is responsible for clarifying the record, not the reporter.
• No check interpreter. The same guidance says the reporter will not correct a wrong interpretation even if they notice it; that falls to the parties, who can bring a check interpreter. Decide before the day whether you want one.
• Running out of time. In federal cases a deposition is limited to one day of seven hours unless stipulated or ordered otherwise, and the committee note to Rule 30(d) lists the need for an interpreter as a reason the examination may take longer. Raise it with opposing counsel before the day, not at hour six.
• Remote audio. Under Rule 30(b)(4) parties may stipulate to a deposition by telephone or other remote means. Consecutive interpreting survives video well; it does not survive people talking over each other on a laptop microphone.

Booking a deposition interpreter, and what it costs

By video, a two-hour deposition of a witness is $160, with no travel. In person the rate is $110 an hour with a two-hour minimum, billed per interpreter from the scheduled start: a deposition noticed for 9 a.m. and finishing at 2 p.m. is five hours, $550, plus travel at $0.70 per mile from the interpreter's location, confirmed before you book. A full day with one interpreter, 9 to 5, is $880. Interpreting a full day alone is demanding, and a long day may need two interpreters working in relay, which doubles the hourly figure; we will say so when we quote.

Interpreters' fees can matter after the case too. In federal court, compensation of interpreters is among the costs that can be taxed under 28 U.S.C. 1920(6), and the Supreme Court held in Taniguchi v. Kan Pacific Saipan that the term covers oral interpretation, not the translation of documents. Whether a particular deposition fee is recoverable is for the court; keep the invoice.

What to send the interpreter in advance

• The caption and case number, the witness's name and country of origin, and the language and variety (Mexican or Central American Spanish, Brazilian or European Portuguese).
• Names of people, companies, places and products likely to come up, with spellings. Names are where transcripts are most often wrong.
• The exhibits, or at least the ones the witness will be asked to read or explain — under the protective order if there is one.
• The subject matter: a construction defect, a medical negligence case and a wage claim each have their own vocabulary.
• Whether it is in person, by video or hybrid, the platform, and whether the court reporter will provide a realtime feed.

By video, by phone or in person

Virtual interpreting runs on Zoom, Google Meet or Microsoft Teams, or over the telephone. It is quicker to arrange, costs less and carries no travel charge, and it suits appointments, calls and most meetings.

In person is what venues with their own rules tend to expect, and the right choice when documents are being signed or several people are speaking at once. Tell us the platform, or the city and the venue, when you send the request.

Languages

The standard-availability languages are: Spanish, Portuguese, French, Mandarin, Cantonese, Arabic, Russian, Korean, Vietnamese, Haitian Creole, Polish, Italian, German, Japanese, Hindi, Urdu, Persian, Turkish, Ukrainian, Tagalog, Bengali, Punjabi, Gujarati, Tamil, Armenian, Greek, Hebrew, Romanian, Serbian, Bosnian, Somali and Nepali. Every other language we offer carries the 25–30% limited-availability rate. If a language is not on that list it is not because we cannot do it — it is because the pool of qualified interpreters in the United States is small enough that we will not promise a date without checking.

Each language has its own page on what to watch for — dialects, names, dates, who the speakers usually are: see interpreters by language.

What it costs

Rates are per interpreter, per hour, and billed from the scheduled start time rather than from when everyone actually arrives.

• Virtual — $80 per hour, one-hour minimum. Zoom, Google Meet, Teams or telephone.
• In person — $110 per hour, two-hour minimum.
• Limited-availability languages — add 25–30%. Which languages those are is listed below rather than left vague.
• Travel for in-person work — $0.70 per mile from the interpreter's location.

How the travel charge works out

Travel is charged at $0.70 per mile from the interpreter's location, which means you can work it out rather than wait for a quote: a 20-mile round trip is $14, a 60-mile round trip is $42, a 150-mile round trip is $105. There is no separate call-out fee on top.

We will not pretend to know in advance where the interpreter will be coming from — that depends on the language, the date and the venue. What we do is confirm the interpreter and the exact travel figure before you book, so it is never a surprise on the invoice. Virtual assignments carry no travel charge at all, which is one reason most of what we do is virtual.

How booking an interpreter works

• You send the request with the form below: the language, the setting, the format, the date and how long it should last.
• We confirm before you commit: the interpreter, the exact price and the travel figure if there is one. We reply the same business day, and no payment is taken at this stage.
• You confirm, and the interpreter is booked for your date.

What to have ready

The more of this comes in the first message, the fewer exchanges before you have a price:

• The language, the date, the start time and how long it should run.
• Virtual or in person: the platform, or the city and the venue.
• The setting and the subject matter.
• How many people need interpreting for.
• Any credential the venue requires of the interpreter.

Request an interpreter

Tell us the date, the language and the setting and we will come back with the interpreter, the exact price and the travel figure if there is one — before you commit to anything.

Sources

What this page says about the rules was checked against these official sources on October 21, 2026. Rules change; the source is always the authority.

• Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 28 — Persons Before Whom Depositions May Be Taken (LII)
• Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 30 — Depositions by Oral Examination, with the 2000 committee note on duration (LII)
• Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 604 — Interpreter (LII)
• 28 U.S.C. 1920 — Taxation of costs (LII)
• Supreme Court of the United States — Taniguchi v. Kan Pacific Saipan, Ltd., No. 10-1472 (May 21, 2012) (LII)
• Court Reporters Board of California — Best Practice Pointer: Interpreted Depositions (revised March 2025)
• California Legislature — AB 2370 (2014), amending Government Code 68561, including subdivision (h) on depositions

Frequently asked questions

Related services

For firms and institutions

From the blog