Free Shipping on Orders Over $200

Does FRCP 30(b)(6) Apply in State Court? A Litigation Guide

Aaron DeShaw |

FRCP 30(b)(6) is a cornerstone of federal discovery, enabling parties to depose businesses, organizations and governmental entities through designated representatives. However, this rule does not automatically apply in state courts, which operate under their own procedural codes. While many states have adopted analogous rules, their implementation varies significantly. Understanding these distinctions is critical for litigators navigating organizational depositions across jurisdictions.

FRCP 30(b)(6) is Exclusively a Federal Rule

The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure govern proceedings in U.S. district courts but hold no direct authority in state courts. Each state develops its own civil procedure rules, meaning:

  • FRCP 30(b)(6) has no authoritative binding effect in state court litigation.
  • State courts may adopt similar mechanisms, but they function under distinct rules and case law. For example, Maryland’s Rule 2-412(d) mirrors FRCP 30(b)(6) but exists as an independent state provision.

State-Level Equivalents: Adoption and Variation

Most states have organizational deposition rules modeled after FRCP 30(b)(6), though key differences exist:

Feature Federal Rule 30(b)(6) Typical State Analogues
Scope Applies to corporations, government agencies, partnerships Varies by state; some exclude nonprofits
Notice Specificity Requires "reasonable particularity" in topics Similar, but state courts may tolerate broader phrasing
Witness Preparation Designee must testify on info "known or reasonably available" Identical standard in some states
Binding Effect Testimony treated as organizational admission Consistent in most adopting states

Critical variations include:

  • Topic Limits: Federal courts increasingly impose topic caps (e.g., 5–10 topics), while states like California lack explicit limits.
  • Objection Deadlines: States may allow later objections than federal courts.
  • Remote Testimony: States like Texas permit virtual depositions more readily than federal courts post-pandemic.

Jurisdictional Examples

  1. Maryland: Rule 2-412(d) is "substantively similar" to FRCP 30(b)(6), requiring identical witness preparation standards.

  2. California: No direct counterpart; organizational depositions rely on case law interpreting CCP §2025.230.

  3. New York: Commercial Division Rule 11-d mirrors FRCP 30(b)(6) but adds mandatory pre-deposition conferences.

Strategic Implications for State Litigation

  • Research State Rules First: Never assume FRCP standards apply. Consult specific state codes.
  • Challenge Overbroad Notices: In states without topic limits, move to quash notices using federal proportionality arguments.
  • Prepare Designees Meticulously: State courts impose sanctions for unprepared witnesses, mirroring federal penalties like evidence preclusion.
  • Leverage "Meet and Confer": States with conferral requirements mandate early topic negotiations—use this to narrow the scope of the deposition.

When States Lack Analogues

In jurisdictions without organizational deposition rules:

  • Depose individual officers under standard procedures.
  • Use requests for admission to establish organizational positions.
  • Seek judicial orders compelling entity-wide testimony via motions.

Best Practices for Cross-Jurisdictional Cases

  1. Federal-to-State Transition: If a case moves to state court, reissue notices under state rules—FRCP 30(b)(6) becomes invalid.

  2. Document Demands: Pair depositions with state-specific document requests to offset weaker deposition tools.

  3. Local Counsel Collaboration: Engage local experts to navigate nuances, especially in states like Delaware with unique corporate procedures.

Books for Lawyers on FRCP 30(b)(6) Depositions

There are a number of books that help lawyers learn practical skills such as creating effective notices for 30(b)(6) depositions, methods for taking these depositions, and preventing non-responsive answers:

30(b)(6): Deposing Corporations, Organizations & the Government

This book is a definitive guide to deposing business entities, organizations and governmental entities. The book covers the use of these depositions in federal court, noting all of the important case law. Additionally, the book provides an overview of each state's equivalent procedural rules, how they differ from FRCP 30(b)(6), and the applicable state court case law pertaining to these depositions.  It is the only book solely focused on corporate representative depositions that fully develops the concepts necessary to master this area of practice. The Advisory Committee on Civil Rules used the first edition of this book when considering changes to the rule in 2016. The second edition includes the most recent changes to the rule implemented in 2020.

The Deposition Handbook, 6th Edition

This is the definitive book on depositions of all varieties, written for lawyers in all areas of practice.  Now in its 6th edition, the book has expanded to cover the new version of 30b6, video depositions, zoom depositions, and much more.  Used by everyone from in house counsel for Fortune 500 companies, Big Law such as Jones Day and Susman Godfrey, and top tier law schools including Harvard Law School.

Additional books and videos for lawyers on 30(b)(6) can be found here.

Conclusion

FRCP 30(b)(6) does not apply in state court, but its principles influence state rules of civil procedure.  As state courts evolve their approaches—some adopting federal reforms like mandatory conferral—staying updated on local rules remains essential for effective organizational discovery.