Title: In Re: Amendments to the Florida Family Law Rules of Procedure
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: SC14-1507
State: Florida
Issuer: Florida Supreme Court
Date: January 22, 2015

Supreme Court of Florida 
 
 
____________ 
 
No. SC14-1507 
____________ 
 
 
IN RE:  AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA FAMILY LAW RULES OF 
PROCEDURE. 
 
[January 22, 2015] 
 
PER CURIAM. 
This matter is before the Court for consideration of proposed new Florida 
Family Law Rule of Procedure 12.451 (Taking Testimony).  We have jurisdiction,1 
and adopt the new rule, as proposed by The Florida Bar’s Family Law Rules 
Committee (Committee). 
 
New Family Law Rule of Procedure 12.451 mirrors Florida Rule of Civil 
Procedure 1.451 (Taking Testimony), which “authorizes a court to permit 
testimony at a civil hearing or trial by audio or video communication equipment by 
agreement of the parties or for good cause shown on written request of a party and 
reasonable notice to all other parties.”  See In re: Amends. to the Fla. Rules of Civ. 
                                          
 
 
1.  See art. V, § 2(a), Fla. Const.   
 
 
- 2 - 
Proc., 131 So. 3d 643, 644 (Fla. 2013) (adopting new Florida Rule of Civil 
Procedure 1.451).  The Committee determined that the requirements of rule 1.451 
for allowing a court to permit testimony to be taken electronically are especially 
well suited to family law cases, and voted 22-0 to propose, out of cycle, that the 
civil rule be adopted as a family law rule.2  The Florida Bar Board of Governors 
approved the proposal by a vote of 39-0.  Both the Committee and the Court 
published proposed new rule 12.451 for comment.  No comments were received by 
either the Committee or the Court. 
 
New Family Law Rule of Procedure 12.451 mirrors Rule of Civil Procedure 
1.451 and provides in subdivision (b) that “[t]he court may permit a witness to 
testify at a hearing or trial by contemporaneous audio or video communication 
equipment (1) by agreement of the parties or (2) for good cause shown upon 
written request of a party upon reasonable notice to all other parties.”   
 
Accordingly, we adopt new Florida Family Law Rule of Procedure 12.451, 
as reflected in the appendix to this opinion.  The new rule shall become effective 
immediately upon the release of this opinion. 
 
It is so ordered. 
LABARGA, C.J., and PARIENTE, LEWIS, QUINCE, CANADY, POLSTON, 
and PERRY, JJ., concur.  
                                          
 
 
2.  See Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.140(e). 
 
 
- 3 - 
THE FILING OF A MOTION FOR REHEARING SHALL NOT ALTER THE 
EFFECTIVE DATE OF THESE AMENDMENTS.  
 
Original Proceedings – Family Law Rules Committee  
 
Elizabeth Ann Blackburn, Chair, Family Law Rules Committee, Revis & 
Blackburn, P.A., Daytona Beach, Florida; John F. Harkness, Jr., Executive 
Director, and Ellen H. Sloyer, Bar Staff Liaison, The Florida Bar, Tallahassee, 
Florida,  
 
for Petitioner 
 
 
 
 
- 4 - 
APPENDIX 
 
RULE 12.451. 
TAKING TESTIMONY 
 
 
(a) 
Testimony at Hearing or Trial. When testifying at a hearing or trial, 
a witness must be physically present unless otherwise provided by law or rule of 
procedure. 
 
 
(b) 
Communication Equipment. The court may permit a witness to 
testify at a hearing or trial by contemporaneous audio or video communication 
equipment (1) by agreement of the parties or (2) for good cause shown upon 
written request of a party upon reasonable notice to all other parties. The request 
and notice must contain the substance of the proposed testimony and an estimate of 
the length of the proposed testimony. In considering sufficient good cause, the 
court shall weigh and address in its order the reasons stated for testimony by 
communication equipment against the potential for prejudice to the objecting party. 
 
 
(c) 
Required Equipment. Communication equipment as used in this rule 
means a conference telephone or other electronic device that permits all those 
appearing or participating to hear and speak to each other simultaneously and 
permits all conversations of all parties to be audible to all persons present. 
Contemporaneous video communication equipment must make the witness visible 
to all participants during the testimony. For testimony by any of the foregoing 
means, there must be appropriate safeguards for the court to maintain sufficient 
control over the equipment and the transmission of the testimony, so that the court 
may stop the communication to accommodate objection or prevent prejudice. 
 
 
(d) 
Oath. Testimony may be taken through communication equipment 
only if a notary public or other person authorized to administer oaths in the 
witness’s jurisdiction is present with the witness and administers the oath 
consistent with the laws of that jurisdiction. 
 
 
(e) 
Burden of Expense. The cost for the use of the communication 
equipment is the responsibility of the requesting party unless otherwise ordered by 
the court. 
 
Committee Note 
 
 
2015 Adoption. This rule allows the parties to agree, or one or more parties 
to request, that the court authorize presentation of witness testimony by 
 
 
- 5 - 
contemporaneous video or audio communications equipment. A party seeking to 
present such testimony over the objection of another party must still satisfy the 
good-cause standard. In determining whether good cause exists, the trial court may 
consider such factors as the type and stage of proceeding, the presence or absence 
of constitutionally protected rights, the importance of the testimony to the 
resolution of the case, the amount in controversy in the case, the relative cost or 
inconvenience of requiring the presence of the witness in court, the ability of 
counsel to use necessary exhibits or demonstrative aids, the limitation (if any) 
placed on the opportunity for opposing counsel and the finder of fact to observe the 
witness’s demeanor, the potential for unfair surprise, the witness’s affiliation with 
one or more parties, any other factors the court reasonably deems material to 
weighing the justification the requesting party has offered in support of the request 
to allow a witness to testify by communications equipment against the potential 
prejudice to the objecting party. With the advance of technology, the cost and 
availability of contemporaneous video testimony may be considered by the court in 
determining whether good cause is established for audio testimony.