5 C.F.R. § 1201.33

Federal witnesses

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Every Federal agency or corporation, including nonparties, must make its employees or personnel available to furnish sworn statements or to appear at a deposition or hearing when ordered by the judge to do so. When providing those statements or appearing at a deposition or at the hearing, Federal employee witnesses will be in official duty status (i.e., entitled to pay and benefits including travel and per diem, where appropriate). When a desired witness is employed by an agency that is not a party to the Board proceeding, the requesting party may avail itself of the provisions of §§ 1201.81 through 1201.85 regarding subpoenas to ensure the attendance of the witness. In addition, the Board and the parties will implement this provision, to the maximum extent possible, to avoid conflict with other regulations governing the production of Federal employees in matters in litigation.

(b) A Federal employee who is denied the official time required by paragraph (a) of this section may file a written request that the judge order the employing agency to provide such official time. The judge will act on such a request promptly and, where warranted, will order the agency to comply with the requirements of paragraph (a) of this section.

[54 FR 53504, Dec. 29, 1989, as amended at 62 FR 48935, Sept. 18, 1997; 77 FR 62365, Oct. 12, 2012; 89 FR 72961, Sept. 9, 2024]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 5 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1981–2026 · leading case: U.S. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv. v. Fed. Labor Relations Auth., 4 F.3d 268 (4th Cir. 1993).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

U.S. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv. v. Fed. Labor Relations Auth., 4 F.3d 268 (4th Cir. 1993). “5 C.F.R. §§ 1201.33 , 1201.73(a). MSPB’s regulations do not address the pay status of the parties’ representatives (of which the agency’s will, of course, always be on “official” time), and FLRA has concluded that no statute or regulation precludes its authorization of an…”

Dep't of Air Force v. Fed. Labor Relations Auth., 877 F.2d 1036 (D.C. Cir. 1989). “” 5 C.F.R. § 1201.33 (1988). This regulation was promulgated pursuant to the MSPB’s enabling statute, 5 U.”

Thompson v. McDonough (N.D. Okla. 2024). · cites it 2× “30(b)(6) and 5 C.F.R. § 1201.33 . Neither applies here.”

William Cunningham v. Dep't of Labor (MSPB 2026). “5 C.F.R. § 1201.33 . The fact that S.S. and T.”

Deitch v. Bliss, 512 F. Supp. 605 (E.D.N.C. 1981). “5 C.F.R. § 1201.33 . Thus, the prejudice to plaintiff resulting from the holding of the hearing on his downgrading in the State of Washington will be minimal.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.