New Feature: Filter Content By Document and/or Case Type

New Feature: Filter Content by Case and Document Type

In the ever-evolving world of litigation, efficiency and accuracy are crucial for success. Legal professionals understand the importance of having quick access to relevant information. As a leading provider of innovative legal solutions, Briefpoint is proud to announce its latest feature update – the ability to filter objections and responses by document and case type. This groundbreaking tool ensures that litigators can swiftly locate pertinent work product while drafting discovery responses, saving valuable time and promoting standardization across all cases within an organization.

1. Time-saving: With a vast database of objections and responses at their disposal, litigators often find themselves sifting through massive amounts of information to find what they need. Briefpoint’s new case type filter eliminates the need for tedious and time-consuming searches, streamlining the process and allowing legal professionals to focus on their primary task – crafting compelling arguments for their clients.
2. Standardization: Large organizations often struggle to maintain uniformity in their responses across cases. With the new case type filter, organizations can easily input their history of responses, ensuring that all team members have access to consistent information. 

Step-by-Step Guide to Using the Case Type Filter Feature  

1. Accessing the Feature: To begin using the case type filter, log in to your Briefpoint account and navigate to your Library’s discovery response drafting section.
2. Selecting the Case Type: Choose your content and locate the case type dropdown menu located near the top of the page. Click on the menu and choose the appropriate case type from the list provided. 
3. Drafting Responses: With the relevant objections and responses now labeled, you can begin drafting your discovery responses with ease. Select the desired case type from the Edit Case page and now the content that you similarly tagged is surfaced right where you respond. The seamless integration of the case type filter allows for a smooth drafting process without the need to switch between screens or search for additional information. 

Briefpoint’s new case type filter feature is a game-changer for litigators, streamlining the discovery response process and promoting consistency within legal teams. By providing easy access to relevant objections and responses, this feature saves time and allows litigators to focus on what truly matters – winning cases for their clients. With Briefpoint’s commitment to innovation and constant improvement, we look forward to seeing how this new feature will revolutionize the way legal professionals work and achieve success in the courtroom.

Best 5 Gavel Software Alternatives in 2024

The Work Product Doctrine in California (2024 Guide for Litigation Attorneys)

Discovery Responses: Federal Rules and Workflow

Discovery Responses: Federal Rules and Workflow

Legal content overseen by Nathan Walter, Esq., attorney licensed in California (State Bar No. 313299).

A defense team is served with interrogatories, requests for production and requests for admission, and the records needed to answer them sit with several people at the client. Discovery responses are the written answers, objections and admissions a party serves after receiving written discovery requests.

This article covers federal civil litigation in U.S. district courts under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP).

The article sets out what each type of response must contain, the federal base response periods, a five-step workflow, how to write specific objections and how teams automate the work. The guidance supports discovery workflows for defense firms and in-house counsel who coordinate company records.

What are discovery responses?

Discovery responses are a party’s written replies to written discovery requests served by another party: answers to interrogatories, responses to requests for production, and answers or objections to requests for admission. A request, its written response and any documents produced in reply are three separate things.

This hub does not cover deposition testimony, criminal discovery or procurement proposals. It also does not cover initial disclosures under FRCP 26(a)(1), which a party makes “without awaiting a discovery request.” Responses, by contrast, are triggered by a request.

Three types of written discovery and their response requirements

Each federal device has its own response rule.

Interrogatories: written answers under oath

Under FRCP 33(b)(3), each interrogatory must, to the extent it is not objected to, be answered separately and fully in writing under oath. Under FRCP 33(b)(5), the person who makes the answers signs them, and the attorney who objects signs any objections. For an organization, FRCP 33(b)(1)(B) directs the answers to come from an officer or agent who furnishes the information available to the party.

The interrogatory questions and answers guide has a longer sample library.

Requests for production: a response and a production plan

A request for production (RFP) asks a party to produce documents, electronically stored information (ESI) or tangible things in its possession, custody, or control (FRCP 34(a)(1)). The written response and the production are separate. Under FRCP 34(b)(2)(B), for each item or category the response must either state that inspection will be permitted as requested or state with specificity the grounds for objecting, including the reasons. A party may state that it will produce copies instead, and must then complete production by the time specified in the request or another reasonable time stated in the response.

An objection must also say whether responsive materials are being withheld on that basis, and an objection to part of a request must specify the part and permit inspection of the rest (FRCP 34(b)(2)(C)). The requests for production hub covers Rule 34 in detail.

Requests for admission: admit, deny or qualify

A request for admission (RFA) asks a party to admit the truth of a matter or the genuineness of a document, and its function is to narrow the issues rather than gather narrative information. Under FRCP 36(a)(4), a response that is not an admission must specifically deny the matter or state in detail why the party cannot truthfully admit or deny it. A denial must fairly respond to the substance, and a party that qualifies an answer or denies in part must specify the part admitted.

Lack of knowledge is a permitted reason only if the party states it made reasonable inquiry and that the information it knows or can readily obtain is insufficient. Under FRCP 36(a)(5), the grounds for an objection must be stated.

For the full workflow, see responding to requests for admission.

Federal deadlines for discovery responses

These are base periods, not a deadline calculator. They apply in federal court, and a court order or stipulation may change them.

Rules 6 and 29 address time computation, additional time after certain service methods, and discovery stipulations.

Under FRCP 6(a)(1), you exclude the day of the triggering event, count every day including weekends and legal holidays, and include the last day, unless it falls on a Saturday, Sunday or legal holiday, in which case the period runs to the next day that is not one. Under FRCP 6(d), when a period runs from service, 3 days are added after the period otherwise expires under Rule 6(a) only for service under Rule 5(b)(2)(C), (D) or (F). These cover mail, leaving with the clerk and other means consented to; electronic service does not receive the added 3 days.

Under FRCP 29(b), unless the court orders otherwise, parties may stipulate to modify discovery procedures, but a stipulation extending the time for any form of discovery needs court approval if it would interfere with the time set for completing discovery, for hearing a motion, or for trial.

How to prepare a complete response set

The steps below are suggested firm practice. They are not legal mandates or a description of any software screen.

1. Review the requests and assign responsibility

Record how and when each set was served, the request numbers, the confirmed response date and the internal review dates. Name a responsible attorney and a factual owner at the client for each request or group of requests. Confirm the response date against the rules above and any order or stipulation instead of relying on a default.

2. Gather facts and responsive documents

In-house teams identify the business contacts and systems that hold the information. Defense counsel decides how response issues are handled.

Keep responsive facts and documents separate from counsel’s analysis, which may qualify for trial-preparation protection under FRCP 26(b)(3). Whether a particular record is within the party’s possession, custody, or control (FRCP 34(a)(1)) depends on the facts, and an insurer’s or affiliate’s records should not be assumed to be inside or outside it.

3. Draft one response for each request

Match the request numbering and answer the question that was asked. Tie each factual statement to a source in the client’s information.

Where information is missing, mark the gap for follow-up and do not treat the placeholder as a finished answer. The device-specific rules above govern what each response must say.

4. Reconcile the draft with the production

Compare what the responses promise, the materials collected, any statements about withheld material and the pages cited. Bates numbers are sequential identifiers stamped on produced pages.

They help you cite and check a production. FRCP 34(b)(2)(E) requires specified organization and production forms, not Bates numbering as a universal method.

5. Obtain the required signatures and serve

Interrogatory answers are made under oath and signed by the person answering, with the attorney signing objections (FRCP 33(b)(3), FRCP 33(b)(5)). A response to a request for admission must be signed by the party or its attorney (FRCP 36(a)(3)).

Before service, the attorney reviews the facts, the legal grounds for each objection, the signatures and the production. Method of service and court-filing details depend on other rules and any local rules and are outside this article.

Specific objections, privilege and response examples

Tie each objection to the request

The scope of discovery under FRCP 26(b)(1) covers nonprivileged matter that is relevant to a party’s claim or defense and proportional to the needs of the case, considering factors the rule lists. For interrogatories, FRCP 33(b)(4) requires the grounds to be stated with specificity, and a ground not stated in a timely objection is waived unless the court excuses the failure for good cause.

For production requests, FRCP 34(b)(2)(B) and FRCP 34(b)(2)(C) require the reasons and a statement about withholding. An objection on a standard list still has to fit the request it answers. The discovery objections cheat sheet is the reference for objection language.

Explain privilege claims without revealing protected content

When a party withholds otherwise discoverable information as privileged or protected trial-preparation material, FRCP 26(b)(5)(A) requires it to make the claim expressly and describe the nature of what is withheld in a way that, without revealing the protected information, lets other parties assess the claim. A privilege log can document these claims; Rule 26(b)(5)(A) itself does not prescribe a table format or a numerical log deadline. Confidentiality alone does not make information privileged; FRCP 26(c)(1)(G) separately addresses protective orders for specified confidential information.

Two short response illustrations

These examples are invented, incomplete illustrations in a defense-side employment matter, not service-ready templates. Bracketed items are placeholders.

A narrow response to a production request:

The response tracks the request, names the material, states when production will be complete and addresses withholding, as FRCP 34(b)(2)(B) and FRCP 34(b)(2)(C) call for.

A response to a request for admission:

Each proposition gets its own answer: receipt is admitted and the disputed reason is denied. FRCP 36(a)(4) calls for a denial that fairly responds to the substance of the matter.

Correcting incomplete responses and handling disputes

Supplement material gaps when the rule requires it

Under FRCP 26(e)(1), a party that has responded to an interrogatory, request for production or request for admission must timely supplement or correct a materially incomplete or incorrect response if the additional or corrective information has not otherwise been made known to the other parties during discovery or in writing. The party must also supplement or correct as ordered by the court. Supplementing does not itself withdraw an admission; that is addressed in FRCP 36(b).

Because new facts and documents can arrive after service, a follow-up list with a named owner for each open item is a practical safeguard; the rule itself does not require one.

Distinguish deficient answers from missed responses

A party seeking a complete interrogatory answer or a response, production or inspection under Rule 34 may move to compel under FRCP 37(a)(3)(B). Challenges to the sufficiency of an admission answer or objection instead proceed under FRCP 36(a)(6).

A Rule 37(a) motion to compel must include a certification that the movant conferred or tried in good faith to confer to obtain the response without court action (FRCP 37(a)(1)). For purposes of that subdivision, an evasive or incomplete answer or response is treated as a failure to answer or respond (FRCP 37(a)(4)).

If the motion is granted, or the discovery is provided after filing, the court must generally, after giving an opportunity to be heard, require payment of the movant’s reasonable expenses incurred in making the motion, including attorney’s fees, but not where the motion was filed before a good-faith attempt, the response or objection was substantially justified, or other circumstances make an award unjust (FRCP 37(a)(5)(A)).

Total failure to respond can support Rule 37(d) sanctions without a prior order compelling a response. Under FRCP 37(d)(1)(A)(ii), the court may, on motion, order sanctions when a party properly served with interrogatories or a request for inspection fails to serve its answers, objections or written response, and the motion needs its own good-faith certification (FRCP 37(d)(1)(B)).

Requests for admission have a separate consequence: under FRCP 36(a)(3), an unanswered matter is admitted. None of this makes sanctions automatic, and ignoring a request is not a lawful way to manage it.

State rules

The discussion above is federal. It does not supply state-court deadlines, limits or forms, and state rules differ. For a state-specific guide, see California interrogatory responses.

How do firms automate discovery responses with Briefpoint?

Firms can combine response drafting, client information collection and document-production preparation, with attorneys reviewing the result before it goes out.

Briefpoint drafts responses and objections to interrogatories, requests for production and requests for admission, and the output is editable in Microsoft Word. Client Bridge client collection sends clients plain-language questions through a secure link so they can answer and upload documents for attorney review. Autodoc document production finds responsive documents, adds page-level Bates citations and builds a Bates-numbered production package.

For a longer walkthrough of the production side, see how to automate responses to requests for production. The attorney retains final review of every response, objection and production.

See how Briefpoint fits your team’s response workflow: Book a demo.

Watch the Briefpoint demo:

FAQs About Discovery Responses

Can I answer an interrogatory by referring to business records?

Sometimes. Under FRCP 33(d), a responding party may do so only if the answer can be found by examining or summarizing its business records, including ESI, and the burden of deriving it is substantially the same for either party. The response must specify the records in enough detail for the other side to locate them as readily as the responding party could, and allow a reasonable opportunity to examine and copy them.

Who answers interrogatories for a corporation?

An officer or agent answers. Under FRCP 33(b)(1)(B), when the party is a public or private corporation, partnership, association or governmental agency, interrogatories are answered by any officer or agent, who must furnish the information available to the party. The answer therefore reflects what the organization knows, not only what the signer personally knows, and the signer must sign under FRCP 33(b)(5).

Can a party withdraw or change an admission?

Only with the court’s permission. Under FRCP 36(b), a matter admitted is conclusively established unless the court, on motion, permits withdrawal or amendment.

Subject to Rule 16(e), the court may permit it if doing so would promote the presentation of the merits and the court is not persuaded that it would prejudice the requesting party in maintaining or defending the action on the merits. Relief is not guaranteed, and a supplemental response alone does not undo an admission.

Can an admission be used against a party in another lawsuit?

Not under Rule 36. FRCP 36(b) states that an admission under that rule is not an admission for any other purpose and cannot be used against the party in any other proceeding. FRCP 36(a)(1) likewise frames requests as being for “the pending action only.” The limit applies to the admission itself; the underlying facts, and evidence about them, are a separate matter governed by other rules.

The information provided on this website does not, and is not intended to, constitute legal advice; instead, all information, content, and materials available on this site are for general informational purposes only. Information on this website may not constitute the most up-to-date legal or other information. This website contains links to other third-party websites. Such links are only for the convenience of the reader, user or browser. Readers of this website should contact their attorney to obtain advice with respect to any particular legal matter. No reader, user, or browser of this site should act or refrain from acting on the basis of information on this site without first seeking legal advice from counsel in the relevant jurisdiction. Only your individual attorney can provide assurances that the information contained herein – and your interpretation of it – is applicable or appropriate to your particular situation. Use of, and access to, this website or any of the links or resources contained within the site do not create an attorney-client relationship between the reader, user, or browser and website authors, contributors, contributing law firms, or committee members and their respective employers.