The Oklahoma Bar Journal August 2022

C ivil P rocedure

Out-of-State Discovery Simplified How the Interstate Depositions and Discovery Act Can Save You and Your Client Time and Money

By Timothy F. Campbell

O N APRIL 23, 2021, Gov. J. Kevin Stitt signed HB 2229 into law. Commonly known as the Uniform Deposition and Discovery Act (UIDDA), this new provision of Oklahoma law went into effect Nov. 1, 2021, codified in 12 O.S. §3250, et seq. , (OSCN 2022). Promulgated by the Uniform Law Commission in 2007, 1 the UIDDA intends to “make it more efficient and inexpensive to depose out-of-state individuals and to produce discover able materials located out of the trial state.” 2

jurisdictions required the payment of a filing fee to open a miscella neous matter through which the court in the foreign jurisdiction would obtain jurisdiction and issue the subpoena. This unnecessarily complicated process had the natural effect of increasing the time and cost associated with conducting discovery in another state. The UIDDA is fairly straight forward and easy to use. The statute itself is relatively short and contains definitional provisions for all key terms used therein. The UIDDA refers to the jurisdic tion outside Oklahoma where the litigation is pending as the “foreign jurisdiction” 6 and the subpoena issued by that court and received in Oklahoma as the “foreign sub poena.” 7 The UIDDA’s definition of “subpoena” contemplates deposi tion subpoenas, subpoenas duces tecum , as well as subpoenas permit ting inspection of premises. 8 The UIDDA broadly defines “person” as any “individual, corporation,

were commonly required. 5 This involved filing a motion, with some judges then requiring a hearing prior to issuing an order allowing discovery to be had out of state. This process would then have to be repeated each time a new source of proof was located in another state. As one can imagine, this process is particularly bur densome in the context of personal injury actions, wherein a non- resident plaintiff who is injured and filed suit in Oklahoma receives medical care and treatment from several healthcare providers in their home state. Each time a new provider was identified, a new letter rogatory and/or commis sion would have to be issued from the district court in Oklahoma to obtain medical records or depose the treating physician. In addition to obtaining a letter rogatory and/or commission, it was not uncommon to then retain local counsel to assist with navigating the subpoena prac tice in the foreign jurisdiction. Some

With the adoption of the act, Oklahoma joined 45 other states (as well as the District of Columbia and U.S. Virgin Islands) in signing on to the UIDDA. 3 The enactment of the UIDDA across the vast major ity of the country serves to bring state subpoena discovery practice more in line with the nationwide subpoena regime found in Rule 45 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 4 The following article aims to provide Oklahoma prac titioners with an overview of the UIDDA and some practical advice on utilizing it to conduct discovery in other states. The UIDDA is a handy tool for eliminating the jurisdictional hur dles that, prior to the promulgation of the UIDDA, commonly drove up the cost and hassle associated with attempting to obtain a source of proof – most often deposition testimony and documents – across state lines. Under prior practice, if discovery was sought out of state, a letter rogatory and/or commission

AUGUST 2022 | 7

THE OKLAHOMA BAR JOURNAL