Massachusetts law:

Massachusetts law: M.G.L.A. 233 § 45 § 45. Deposition for use in another state A person may be summoned and compelled, in like manner and under the same penalties as are provided for a witness before a court, to give his deposition in a cause pending in a court of any other state or government. Such deposition may be taken before a justice of the peace or a notary public in the commonwealth, or before a commissioner appointed under the authority of the state or government in which the action is pending. If the deposition is taken before such commissioner, the witness may be summoned and compelled to appear before him by process from a justice of the peace or a notary public in the commonwealth. Florida law West's F.S.A. § 92.251 92.251. Uniform Foreign Depositions Law (1) This section may be cited as the "Uniform Foreign Depositions Law." (2) Whenever any mandate, writ or commission is issued out of any court of record in any other state, territory, district, or foreign jurisdiction, or whenever upon notice or agreement it is required to take the testimony of a witness or witnesses in this state, witnesses may be compelled to appear and testify in the same manner and by the same process and proceeding as may be employed for the purpose of taking testimony in proceedings pending in this state. (3) This section shall be so interpreted and construed as to effectuate its general purposes to make uniform the law of those states which enact it. Greenlight Fin. Servs., Inc. v. Union Am. Mortgage, Inc., 971 So. 2d 983, 985 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008) Under UFDL, as adopted by Florida in section 92.251 whenever a litigant desires to depose a witness residing in another state, that litigant must first secure the appointment of a commissioner from the court where the litigation originates. See Freedom Newspapers. Inc., 507 So.2d at 1183. The foreign litigant may then apply to the court having personal jurisdiction over the witness for the process necessary to secure the attendance of the witness. Id. (citing Travelers Indem. Co. v. Hill, 388 So.2d 648 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980)). Florida's UFDL specifically provides, in pertinent part, as follows: (2) Whenever any mandate, writ or commission is issued out of any court of record in any other state, territory, district, or foreign jurisdiction, or whenever upon notice or agreement it is required to take the testimony of a witness or witnesses in this state, witnesses may be compelled to appear and testify in the same manner and by the same process and proceeding as may be employed for the purposes of taking testimony in proceedings pending in this state. (Emphasis added). This means that the court where the deposition actually takes place, in this case, Florida, enjoys all necessary powers of enforcement as if the action were taking place in Florida, and the laws of Florida govern any proceedings incident to the deposition. See Freedom Newspapers, Inc.. 507 So.2d at 1184. The trial court in this case, therefore, erred in its determination that it was without jurisdiction to entertain the discovery objections associated with the subject depositions in accordance with Florida law. The UFDA proceeding before the court below is essentially a separate action, distinct from, although ancillary to, the underlying cause of action pending in California. See America Online, Inc. v. Anonymous Publicly Traded Co.. 261 Va. 350, 542 EFTA01206918 S.E.2d 377. 380 (2001)• Warlord v. Childers. 642 S.W.2d 63.65 (Tex.AnD.1982). Indeed, only the court below has jurisdiction to enforce the Florida subpoena duces tecum at issue against this Florida non-party witness. Travelers Indem. Co. v. Hill, 388 So. 2d 648, 650 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1980) Ohio, like Florida, has also adopted the Uniform Foreign Deposition Act. Under these circumstances, when a Florida litigant needs testimony of a witness in Ohio, the first step in the proceedings is to secure the appointment of a commissioner by the Florida court. Application is then made to the Ohio court for the process necessary to secure the attendance of the witness. It seems to us that under ordinary circumstances the appointment of a commissioner is a perfunctory matter barring some showing to the contrary by the adverse party. EFTA01206919