Interpreters Information

The Interpreters Section in the Southern District of California exists and functions pursuant to the mandate of the Court Interpreters Act (Title 28, U.S.C. § 1827.) The Interpreters Section is currently staffed by 14 federally certified interpreters. It is responsible for obtaining the services of qualified interpreters in all languages needed in our Courts.

For inquiries regarding interpreter needs please contact Gloria Mayne, Manager of Interpreter Services, at (619) 557-5205 or gloria_mayne@casd.uscourts.gov.

  • Aspiring Interpreters
  • Contract Interpreters
  • Attorney Resources
 
  USDC Orientation Manual for Aspiring Interpreters USDC Orientation Manual for Aspiring Interpreters
USDC Orientation Manual for Aspiring Interpreters
  Federal Court Interpreter Orientation Manual Federal Court Interpreter Orientation Manual
Federal Court Interpreter Orientation Manual
 
  Forms for Contract Interpreters Forms for Contract Interpreters
Forms for Contract Interpreters
If you have been contacted by the Interpreters Section and will be coming to our Courts for the first time, you will need to fill out the documents below in preparation for your meeting and first assignment
  Standards for Performance and Professional Responsibility for Contract Court Interpreters Standards for Performance and Professional Responsibility for Contract Court Interpreters
Standards for Performance and Professional Responsibility for Contract Court Interpreters
 
  Qualification Categories Qualification Categories
Qualification Categories
  Frequently Asked Questions Frequently Asked Questions
Frequently Asked Questions
  Protecting Privilege: Using Interpreters Responsibly Protecting Privilege: Using Interpreters Responsibly
Protecting Privilege: Using Interpreters Responsibly

Communications between the Interpreter and the client are privileged if the Interpreter is acting as the agent of an attorney.

United States v. Kovel is the bedrock federal decision concerning the use of third parties to facilitate privileged attorney-client communications. In Kovel, the court found that the accountant’s presence in the communication did not cause a privilege waiver because the accountant’s role was primarily to facilitate the attorney-client communication, rather than provide accounting (or translation) services for other reasons. Most federal circuits follow the Kovel directive, including the District of Columbia and fourth circuit.

Many states have enacted statutes and ethics cannons that expressly recognize the applicability of the attorney-client privilege when an interpreter facilitates confidential communication between lawyer and client. These jurisdictions also require attorneys to properly train and monitor their paraprofessionals, including independent contractors. These ethical obligations strongly place primary responsibility for preserving privilege and communicating effectively on the attorney and interpreter.