Howard v. Anglin et al (INMATE 1)

Filing 66

ORDER: it is ORDERED that, if defendant Keith Edwards, or any other named defendant, intends to offer testimony by videoconferencing at trial, he must file, by 5/3/2021, a motion pursuant to FRCP 43(a) asking for permission and explaining why he should be allowed to testify by videoconferencing. Signed by Honorable Judge Myron H. Thompson on 3/22/2021. (amf, )

Case 2:17-cv-00818-MHT-SRW Document 66 Filed 03/22/21 Page 1 of 2

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION
BRANDON HOWARD,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Plaintiff,
v.
J. ANGLIN, et al.,
Defendants.

CIVIL ACTION NO.
2:17cv818-MHT
(WO)

ORDER
During

the

pretrial

hearing

on

March

18,

2021,

defendant Keith Edwards noted that he now lives out of
state and stated that he may want to participate in the
trial virtually, which would include offering testimony
by

videoconferencing

Plaintiff
Federal

Brandon

Rule

of

if

Howard
Civil

he

chooses

objected

Procedure

to
this

to

testify.
request.

43(a)

states

that,

while witnesses’ testimony must generally be taken in
open

court,

“[f]or

good

cause

in

compelling

circumstances and with appropriate safeguards the court
may permit testimony in open court by contemporaneous
transmission from a different location.”

Case 2:17-cv-00818-MHT-SRW Document 66 Filed 03/22/21 Page 2 of 2

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that, if defendant Keith
Edwards, or any other named defendant, intends to offer
testimony by videoconferencing at trial, he must file,
by May 3, 2021, a motion pursuant to Federal Rule of
Civil

Procedure

explaining

why

43(a)
he

asking

should

be

for

allowed

permission
to

and

testify

videoconferencing.
DONE, this the 22nd day of March, 2021.
/s/ Myron H. Thompson
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2

by