Key Takeaway
Watabe accepted English affidavits after Japanese-interpreted depositions. See what it decided and what CPLR 2101(b) still requires for translations.
This article is part of our ongoing affidavits coverage, with 19 published articles analyzing affidavits issues across New York State. Attorney Jason Tenenbaum brings 24+ years of hands-on experience to this analysis, drawing from his work on more than 1,000 appeals, over 100,000 no-fault cases, and recovery of over $100 million for clients throughout Nassau County, Suffolk County, Queens, Brooklyn, Manhattan, and the Bronx. For personalized legal advice about how these principles apply to your specific situation, contact our Long Island office at (516) 750-0595 for a free consultation.
Last reviewed: September 2026.
Still current (September 2026): CPLR 2101(b) still requires an English translation and the translator’s sworn qualifications and accuracy statement for a foreign-language affidavit or exhibit; Watabe addressed affidavits drafted in English.
Watabe v Ci:Labo USA, Inc., 168 AD3d 518 (1st Dept 2019) concerned overtime claims. The employer had not established that the employees were exempt as a matter of law; their descriptions of their duties conflicted with management’s. The First Department affirmed the orders denying the employer summary judgment.
What the court said about English affidavits
Sugioka and Otani had used a Japanese translator at their depositions. That did not prevent them from drafting affidavits in English, and the court accepted those affidavits without a Japanese translator’s affidavit. It also rejected the objection to the electronic signature on Otani’s personally served affidavit.
Free Consultation · No Fee Unless We Win
Does this apply to your situation?
Every case is different. Get a free, confidential case review from an experienced attorney who can tell you exactly where you stand.
The decision does not create an exemption simply because an attorney drafted the document. Nor does it prescribe a language-proficiency hearing. Its holding concerns the English affidavits in that record.
Foreign-language documents still need translation
CPLR 2101(b) requires an English translation when an affidavit or attached exhibit is in a foreign language, together with the translator’s sworn statement of qualifications and accuracy. CPLR 2106 now provides an affirmation alternative for covered sworn statements; it does not remove the translation or accuracy requirements.
For a disputed submission, keep the source-language document, the English version and the translator’s statement together. Establish that the witness understands the account attributed to them. Watabe does not justify treating an English signature page as proof that comprehension occurred.
For electronic signatures, State Technology Law § 304(2) addresses their legal effect. It does not supply missing facts about job duties, overtime exemptions or the witness’s knowledge.
Frequently Asked Questions
Do I need a translator affidavit if my client used an interpreter at deposition?
Not merely because an interpreter was used at deposition. Watabe accepted the English affidavits before it. Foreign-language affidavits or exhibits still raise the separate requirements of CPLR 2101(b).
Can a non-English speaker submit an affidavit in English?
Watabe allowed these witnesses to draft English affidavits despite having used a deposition interpreter. It does not justify attributing an English account to a witness who cannot understand it.
When is a certified translation required?
CPLR 2101(b) requires an English translation of a foreign-language affidavit or attached exhibit and the translator’s statement of qualifications and accuracy. Current CPLR 2106 provides an affirmation alternative for covered sworn statements.
What if the opposing party challenges my client’s English proficiency?
Address the actual challenge with evidence about the witness’s understanding and how the affidavit was prepared. Watabe did not prescribe a mandatory proficiency hearing or a universal evidentiary checklist.
How do I determine if my client needs an interpreter?
Determine whether the witness can understand the questions and accurately communicate the account. Watabe concerns admission of particular English affidavits; it does not replace an individual assessment of interpretation needs.
Connect to the Encyclopedia
- CPLR 2106: current affirmation rules and historical affidavit cases
- Ramirez: electronic signatures under the State Technology Law
- Donsimoni: a foreign oath and conformity certificate
- Furtow: the affidavit’s recital and jurat
- Lopez: expert proof and an unpreserved objection
For review of a particular witness statement, keep its language versions and supporting records together and contact the firm. This historical note is general information, not an assessment of an individual case.
Legal Context
Why This Matters for Your Case
New York law is among the most complex and nuanced in the country, with distinct procedural rules, substantive doctrines, and court systems that differ significantly from other jurisdictions. The Civil Practice Law and Rules (CPLR) governs every stage of civil litigation, from service of process through trial and appeal. The Appellate Division, Appellate Term, and Court of Appeals create a rich and ever-evolving body of case law that practitioners must follow.
Attorney Jason Tenenbaum has practiced across these areas for over 24 years, writing more than 1,000 appellate briefs and publishing over 2,353 legal articles that attorneys and clients rely on for guidance. The analysis in this article reflects real courtroom experience — from motion practice in Civil Court and Supreme Court to oral arguments before the Appellate Division — and a deep understanding of how New York courts actually apply the law in practice.
Keep Reading
More Affidavits Analysis
Who is the attorney?
Civil Kings court case on attorney representation requirements and default judgment appeals in no-fault insurance litigation.
Feb 1, 2020
Electronic Signatures on Physician Reports Are Admissible in New York: Ramirez v Miah
Ramirez accepted an electronically signed physician affirmation. Compare Vista's missing authorization and New York's electronic-signature statutes.
Nov 7, 2018
Electronic signatures unconditionally accepted
New York First Department rules electronic signatures have same validity as handwritten signatures under State Technology Law § 304(2) for legal affidavits and court documents.
Jun 27, 2012
Proof in opposition was insufficient to show a forgery
Learn the legal standards for proving document forgery in New York courts. Expert analysis of JPMorgan Chase Bank v. Bauer case and evidentiary requirements.
Feb 10, 2012
A second affidavit to clarify is allowed
Court ruling clarifies when second affidavits are permissible in legal proceedings, allowing clarification that amplifies but doesn't contradict original testimony.
Aug 23, 2018
Credit Card Collection Defense in New York: Proving the Cardholder Agreement and Assent
Citibank v Abraham: NY credit card plaintiffs must prove the cardholder agreement, assent to changed terms, and an account stated to win summary judgment.
May 3, 2016Frequently Asked Questions
Common Questions About This Topic
5 answers from the firm's New York personal-injury and employment-law practice. Click any question to expand.
Do I need a translator affidavit if my client used an interpreter at deposition?
Not merely because an interpreter was used at deposition. Watabe accepted the English affidavits before it. Foreign-language affidavits or exhibits still raise the separate requirements of CPLR 2101(b).
Can a non-English speaker submit an affidavit in English?
Watabe allowed these witnesses to draft English affidavits despite having used a deposition interpreter. It does not justify attributing an English account to a witness who cannot understand it.
When is a certified translation required?
CPLR 2101(b) requires an English translation of a foreign-language affidavit or attached exhibit and the translator's statement of qualifications and accuracy. Current CPLR 2106 provides an affirmation alternative for covered sworn statements.
What if the opposing party challenges my client’s English proficiency?
Address the actual challenge with evidence about the witness's understanding and how the affidavit was prepared. Watabe did not prescribe a mandatory proficiency hearing or a universal evidentiary checklist.
How do I determine if my client needs an interpreter?
Determine whether the witness can understand the questions and accurately communicate the account. Watabe concerns admission of particular English affidavits; it does not replace an individual assessment of interpretation needs.
Was this article helpful?
Disclaimer: This article is published by the Law Office of Jason Tenenbaum, P.C. for informational and educational purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice, and no attorney-client relationship is formed by reading this content. The legal principles discussed may not apply to your specific situation, and the law may have changed since this article was last updated.
New York law varies by jurisdiction — court decisions in one Appellate Division department may not be followed in another, and local court rules in Nassau County Supreme Court differ from those in Suffolk County Supreme Court, Kings County Civil Court, or Queens County Supreme Court. The Appellate Division, Second Department (which covers Long Island, Brooklyn, Queens, and Staten Island) and the Appellate Term (which hears appeals from lower courts) each have distinct procedural requirements and precedents that affect litigation strategy.
If you need legal help with a affidavits matter, contact our office at (516) 750-0595 for a free consultation. We serve clients throughout Long Island (Huntington, Babylon, Islip, Brookhaven, Smithtown, Riverhead, Southampton, East Hampton), Nassau County (Hempstead, Garden City, Mineola, Great Neck, Manhasset, Freeport, Long Beach, Rockville Centre, Valley Stream, Westbury, Hicksville, Massapequa), Suffolk County (Hauppauge, Deer Park, Bay Shore, Central Islip, Patchogue, Brentwood), Queens, Brooklyn, Manhattan, the Bronx, Staten Island, and Westchester County. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
