The provision in Rule 30 that costs cases is 30.02(f), and it costs them on the defense side more often than the plaintiff side. When you notice a corporation, a partnership, an association, or a governmental agency under 30.02(f), you aren’t deposing a person. You’re deposing the entity through a designee, and the rule’s last operative sentence sets the bar the designee has to clear:
The persons designated must testify about information known or reasonably available to the organization.
Not what the designee knows. What’s known or reasonably available to the organization. Say a designee answers “I don’t know, I wasn’t there” about a subject listed in the notice. That isn’t an incomplete answer. The organization has failed to produce a witness on that subject, and Rule 37.02(b) and Rule 37.04 both reach that failure by name, because each of them applies to “a person designated in Rule 30.02(f) or 31.01 to testify on behalf of a party.”
One detail matters when you’re the one being noticed: the words “prepare” and “preparation” do not appear in Rule 30.02(f). In practice, the duty to prepare lives inside “information known or reasonably available to the organization,” not in a separately stated command. You won’t find a sentence in the rule telling you to educate your designee. You’ll be measured against what the entity knows as a whole.
What does Rule 30.02(f) require of each side?
Both sides have duties, and one of them is fairly new to the rule.
The noticing party “must describe with reasonable particularity the matters for examination.” A notice that lists “all facts relevant to this lawsuit” hasn’t done that, and it’s asking for a protective order under Rule 26.03.
The named organization “must designate one or more officers, directors, or managing agents, or designate other persons who consent to testify on its behalf; and it may set out the matters on which each person designated will testify.” Designating by topic is optional for the responding organization, but it’s usually the smart move when the notice covers ground no single person owns.
Then the duty to confer:
Before or promptly after the notice or subpoena is served, the serving party and the organization must confer in good faith about the matters for examination. A subpoena must advise a non-party organization of its duty to confer with the serving party and to make such a designation.
Take two things from that. The duty to confer runs to non-party organizations as well as parties. And if you’re subpoenaing a non-party entity, your subpoena itself must advise the organization of its duty to confer and to designate. That’s a drafting requirement on your document, not a courtesy. It sits alongside the other content requirements in Rule 45.01(a). See subpoenas under Rule 45.
Last, 30.02(f) isn’t exclusive: “This paragraph (f) does not preclude a deposition by any other procedure allowed by these rules.” Noticing the entity doesn’t cost you the right to depose a named individual, and vice versa.
When may I take a deposition, and do I need leave of court?
After service of the summons. But there are two gates in front of you.
The first gate isn’t in Rule 30 at all. Rule 26.04(a) bars parties from seeking discovery from any source, expressly including under Rule 30.01 and Rule 45, before the parties have conferred and prepared a discovery plan as required by Rule 26.06(c), except in a proceeding exempt from initial disclosure under Rule 26.01(a)(2) or when allowed by stipulation or court order. That’s covered in Rule 26 and the scope of discovery.
The second gate is Rule 30.01, and it’s narrower than lawyers expect:
Leave of court, granted with or without notice, must be obtained only if the plaintiff seeks to take a deposition prior to the expiration of 30 days after service of the summons and complaint upon any defendant or service made pursuant to Rule 4.04, except that leave is not required if a defendant has served a notice of taking deposition or otherwise sought discovery.
Read it slowly. Leave is required only for a plaintiff, only inside the 30 days after service on any defendant or service by publication under Rule 4.04, and not even then if a defendant has already noticed a deposition or otherwise sought discovery. Rule 30.01 also confirms that “[t]he attendance of witnesses may be compelled by subpoena as provided in Rule 45.”
Here’s what isn’t in Rule 30: a numerical cap on depositions. Rules 30.01 through 30.07 set no presumptive limit on how many depositions a party may take. The number is controlled instead by Rule 26.02(b)(1), which lets the court “establish or alter the limits on the number of depositions and interrogatories” on motion or on its own initiative after reasonable notice, and by Rule 26.02(b)(3), which requires the court to limit discovery that is unreasonably cumulative or duplicative or whose burden falls outside the proportionality standard. In practice, the number comes from your scheduling order.
What has to be in the notice?
Rule 30.02(a) requires “reasonable notice in writing to every other party to the action,” stating:
- the name and place for taking the deposition;
- the name and address of each person to be examined, if known — and if the name is not known, “a general description sufficient to identify the person or the particular class or group to which the person belongs”;
- the designation of materials to be produced, attached to or included in the notice, if a subpoena duces tecum is to be served on the person to be examined; and
- whether the deposition will be conducted in person or by remote technology.
That last item is new. The January 1, 2025 amendment added it, and it changes how you draft every notice. Rule 30.02(b) separately requires the notice to state the method of recording. Unless the court orders otherwise, a deposition “may be recorded by audio, audio-and-visual, or stenographic means, and the party taking the deposition shall bear the cost of the recording.” Any party may arrange for a transcript from a non-stenographic recording.
If you’re deposing a party, the notice may come with a Rule 34 request for production at the deposition, and “[t]he procedure of Rule 34 shall apply to the request.” Rule 30.02(e). So the responding party gets the Rule 34 clock, not the deposition date, unless you’ve agreed otherwise.
Can the other side refuse a remote deposition?
Only on good cause, and the noticing party’s election is the presumptive method. That’s the heart of the 2025 amendments, and you need it exactly right, because the burden falls differently for parties and non-parties.
For a party or party-deponent, Rule 30.02(a)(1) requires the objecting party to meet and confer in good faith promptly after objecting, and if that fails, the objecting party may move for a protective order. “The court shall not sustain the objection unless the objecting party demonstrates good cause that the noticing party’s election should be overruled.”
For a non-party deponent, Rule 30.02(a)(2) flips who goes to court. The non-party has to meet and confer on the same terms, but if the dispute isn’t resolved, the noticing party moves to compel, and “[t]he court shall grant the motion unless the objecting non-party deponent demonstrates good cause that the noticing party’s election should be overruled.” Either way, the objector carries good cause. What changes is which side files.
Rule 30.02(g) gives you the venue rule that follows from remote practice: for purposes of Rule 30 and Rules 28.01, 37.01(a), 37.02(a), and 45.03, “a deposition taken by remote technology is taken in the district and at the place where the deponent is to answer questions.” That sentence tells you which court hears a motion arising out of a remote deposition of an out-state witness.
Rule 30.02(d) also covers how things look on the record. The officer’s opening statement must include the officer’s name and business address, the date, time, and place, the deponent’s name, the administration of the oath, and identification of all persons present. Appearance and demeanor “shall not be distorted through camera or sound-recording techniques,” though a background filter or virtual background is expressly permitted.
How long can a deposition run?
One day of seven hours, presumptively. Rule 30.04(b):
Unless otherwise authorized by the court or stipulated by the parties, a deposition is limited to one day of seven hours. The court must allow additional time consistent with Rule 26.02(b) if needed for a fair examination of the deponent or if the deponent or another person, or other circumstance, impedes or delays the examination.
Notice two things. The extra-time provision is mandatory in form: the court “must allow” it on either of two showings, a need for a fair examination or obstruction. And the Advisory Committee Comment to the 2006 amendment adopting the limit is worth quoting to any adversary who treats seven hours as an entitlement: “The rule establishes a presumptive limit on the length of depositions, not the presumptive length.” The comment adds that the rule “does not limit courts from establishing shorter time limits in particular cases.”
When may I instruct a witness not to answer?
Three grounds, and no others. Rule 30.04(a):
Any objection to evidence during a deposition shall be stated concisely and in a non-argumentative and non-suggestive manner. A person may instruct a deponent not to answer only when necessary to preserve a privilege, to enforce a limitation on evidence directed by the court, or to present a motion under paragraph (d).
So: privilege, a court-ordered limitation on evidence, or a motion to suspend under 30.04(d). Relevance isn’t on the list. Burden isn’t on the list. “Asked and answered” isn’t on the list. The Advisory Committee Comment to the 2006 amendment notes that the rule was amended to make the prohibition apply to “all persons (including counsel for a non-party witness), instead of just ‘parties.’” A lawyer appearing only for a subpoenaed non-party is bound by the same limits as counsel of record.
The rest of objection practice is in Rule 30.03: objections to the officer’s qualifications, the manner of taking, the evidence, the conduct of any party, or any other aspect are noted by the officer, “but the examination shall proceed, with the testimony being taken subject to the objections.”
What if the deposition is being conducted abusively?
Rule 30.04(d) is how you stop it. At any time during a deposition, on motion of a party or the deponent, “and upon a showing that the examination is being conducted in bad faith or in such manner as unreasonably to annoy, embarrass, or oppress the deponent or party,” the court where the action is pending, or the court in the district where the deposition is being taken, may order the examination to cease or may limit its scope and manner as provided in Rule 26.03. “Upon demand of the objecting party or deponent, the taking of the deposition shall be suspended for the time necessary to make a motion for an order.” If the order ends the examination, it resumes only on order of the court where the action is pending. Rule 37.01(d) governs expenses on the motion.
Separately, Rule 30.04(c) authorizes sanctions for the obstruction itself: if the court finds an impediment, delay, or other conduct “that has frustrated the fair examination of the deponent, it may impose upon the persons responsible an appropriate sanction, including the reasonable costs and attorney’s fees incurred by any parties as a result thereof.”
What happens after the deposition?
Review isn’t automatic. Under Rule 30.05, the deponent or a party has to request review before completion of the deposition. If that request is made, the deponent then has 30 days after being notified by the officer that the transcript or recording is available to review it and, if there are changes in form or substance, “to sign a statement reciting such changes and the reasons given by the deponent for making them.” If nobody asks on the record before the deposition ends, there’s nothing to invoke later.
Custody may also surprise a federal practitioner. The officer certifies the record, seals it, and “shall promptly send it to the attorney or party who arranged for the transcript or recording, who shall store it under conditions that will protect it against loss, destruction, tampering, or deterioration.” Rule 30.06(a). Depositions aren’t filed with the court. The Advisory Committee explained in 1996 that this difference “is necessary because Minn. R. Civ. P. 5.04 does not permit filing discovery in the absence of an order,” and Rule 5.04(b) still excludes depositions from the filing requirement absent court order or rule. The party taking the deposition must give prompt notice to all other parties when it receives the transcript from the officer. Rule 30.06(c).
What if someone does not show up?
Rule 30.07 handles two failures by the noticing party. If the party giving notice fails to attend and another party attends, the court may order the noticing party to pay that party’s reasonable expenses in attending, including reasonable attorney fees. Rule 30.07(a). If the noticing party fails to serve a subpoena on a non-party witness and the witness doesn’t attend for that reason, the same expense-shifting applies to the parties who showed up expecting testimony. Rule 30.07(b).
A no-show by the deponent falls under a different rule. A party, or an officer, director, employee, or managing agent of a party, or a 30.02(f) designee, who fails to appear after proper notice is subject to Rule 37.04. That rule authorizes the sanctions in Rule 37.02(b)(1), (2), and (3), makes an expense award mandatory absent substantial justification, and forecloses the excuse that the discovery was objectionable “unless the party failing to act has applied for a protective order as provided by Rule 26.03.” A non-party who ignores a subpoena is subject to contempt under Rule 45.05. Compelling discovery under Rule 37 covers the mechanics.
One last thing that isn’t in Rule 30. Your scheduling order, and the assigned judge’s standing orders and practice pointers, will often address deposition practice (length, sequencing, remote appearance, and how discovery disputes get raised) in ways the rules don’t, and they control where they conflict with a lawyer’s assumptions. They’re published on the district’s page at mncourts.gov.
Madgett Law, LLC associates with lawyers on Minnesota matters and takes and defends depositions in Minnesota state and federal court. Send us a message.
Sources: Minn. R. Civ. P. 30.01; 30.02(a) and (a)(1)–(2), 30.02(b), 30.02(c), 30.02(d), 30.02(e), 30.02(f), 30.02(g); 30.03; 30.04(a)–(d); 30.05; 30.06(a), 30.06(c); 30.07(a)–(b); and the Advisory Committee Comments to the 1996, 2006, and 2025 amendments to Rule 30. Also Minn. R. Civ. P. 26.02(b)(1) and (b)(3), 26.03, 26.04(a); 5.04(b); 37.02(b), 37.04; 45.01(a), 45.05. Rule text: the Minnesota Revisor of Statutes’ publication of the Minnesota Rules of Civil Procedure, August 10, 2026; Rule 30 reflects amendments effective January 1, 2025. This article is general legal information about Minnesota procedure, not legal advice; it creates no attorney–client relationship and promises no outcome.