OH · rules
Ohio Sup.R. 9.55
Accommodating Modes of Interpretation
(A) General
Subject to division (B) of this Rule 9.55, court using telephonic interpretation should
accommodate sight translation, consecutive interpretation, or simultaneous interpretation,
as is necessary for proper and effective communication between the court, the parties, and
the limited English proficient speaker.
(B) Sight translation
A court should not use sight translation with telephonic interpretation unless the foreign
language interpreter has access to the documents beforehand and ample time to render the
document from one language into the other. If sight translation is used wit h telephonic
interpretation, the document should be short and routine.
History
Effective Date: July 1, 2014 Amended: November 13, 2025 Commentary (July 1, 2026) Appendix J, Standard 4 was renumbered to Rule 9.55 as part of the 2026 restructuring of the Rules of Superintendence.
Provenance
- Source
- supremecourt.ohio.gov
- Retrieved
- 2026-09-14
- Edition
- 2026-09-14
- Content hash
70ea00ca0c8d87f6e0e29c353d27005021d92c557f2a3a2f701e6a386b340b08
The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.
Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.