7 Best Productivity Tools for Lawyers In 2024

READ MORE

Top 6 Legal Industry Trends to Keep an Eye On in 2024

READ MORE

Best 5 Gavel Software Alternatives in 2024

READ MORE

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

READ MORE

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.

Request type	Federal base response period	Important qualification
Interrogatories	30 days after service (FRCP 33(b)(2))	A shorter or longer time may be stipulated under Rule 29 or ordered by the court
Requests for production	30 days after service, or for early requests delivered under Rule 26(d)(2), 30 days after the parties’ first Rule 26(f) conference (FRCP 34(b)(2)(A))	The written response is due then; production must be completed by the time in the request or another reasonable time stated in the response
Requests for admission	30 days after service (FRCP 36(a)(3))	A matter is admitted unless a signed written answer or objection is served in time; stipulation or court order may change the period

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.

READ MORE

Requests for Production: Rules, Responses, and Examples

Requests for Production: Rules, Responses, and Examples

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

A document demand creates two separate jobs: serving the written response, and getting the documents or the inspection to the other side. Requests for production are the Rule 34 device behind both. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 34(a), a party may serve on any other party a request to produce documents, electronically stored information or tangible things, or to permit entry onto land or other property.

This guide explains requests for production in federal civil litigation, then separates the rules for California state-court cases; it does not cover other states.

Written for litigators at plaintiff firms and their paralegals, it covers the governing rules, what a response must say and two examples.

What are requests for production?

A request for production is a written demand that one party serves on another party. Rule 34(a)(1)(A) reaches designated documents and electronically stored information (ESI) stored in any medium. Rule 34(a)(1)(B) reaches designated tangible things, and Rule 34(a)(2) covers entry onto designated land or other property so the requester can inspect, measure, survey, photograph, test or sample it. The items must be in the responding party’s “possession, custody, or control” under Rule 34(a)(1). The rule does not define “control,” and this guide does not state a test for it.

Three things happen in sequence: the demand, the written response, and the production or inspection itself. Rule 34(b)(2)(B) treats the last two separately, because a response may say that copies will be produced and set the completion time.

For the software-assisted workflow, see how to automate responses to requests for production.

Requests for Production: Quick Reference

Issue	Federal	California
Written response	Ordinarily 30 days after service (Rule 34(b)(2)(A))	Ordinarily 30 days after service (CCP 2031.260(a))
Time added after service	3 days only for Rule 5(b)(2)(C), (D) or (F) service; Rule 5(b)(2)(E) is not listed (Rule 6(d))	Generally 2 court days after electronic service made before January 1, 2027 (CCP 1010.6(a)(3)(B)–(C)); none for electronic service made on or after that date (AB 540)
Organizing production	Usual course of business, or organized and labeled by request category; unless stipulated or ordered otherwise (Rule 34(b)(2)(E)(i))	Identify with the specific request number (CCP 2031.280(a))

This is a reference, not a deadline calculator. The California column covers ordinary unlimited civil cases. The sections below address the federal early-delivery exception, extensions, service details and California special proceedings.

Federal rules for requesting documents

Scope and reasonable particularity

Rule 34(a) allows requests “within the scope of Rule 26(b).” Rule 26(b)(1) permits discovery of any nonprivileged matter that is relevant to any party’s claim or defense and proportional to the needs of the case. The proportionality factors are:

• the importance of the issues at stake in the action;
• the amount in controversy;
• the parties’ relative access to relevant information;
• the parties’ resources;
• the importance of the discovery in resolving the issues; and
• whether the burden or expense of the proposed discovery outweighs its likely benefit.

Under Rule 26(b)(1), information within that scope need not be admissible in evidence to be discoverable.

Rule 34(b)(1)(A) requires a request to describe “with reasonable particularity” each item or category of items. A category is allowed, so the requester does not have to know every exact document in advance. The rule’s text does not require a request to explain why an item is relevant.

Inspection details and electronic format

Rule 34(b)(1)(B) requires a request to specify a reasonable time, place and manner for the inspection and any related acts. Rule 34(b)(1)(C) says a request may specify the form or forms in which ESI is to be produced. Specifying a form is optional.

Identifying the source, date range and topic of what you want is drafting practice, not a universal checklist in the rule. It helps the responding party see what the category covers.

Federal response deadlines and production

Calculate the written-response deadline

Rule 34(b)(2)(A) requires a written response within 30 days after service. If the request was delivered early under Rule 26(d)(2), the 30 days run from the parties’ first Rule 26(f) conference. More than 21 days after a party is served with the summons and complaint, Rule 26(d)(2)(A) permits delivery to that party by any other party, or by that party to any plaintiff or another served party, and Rule 26(d)(2)(B) treats the request as served at the first Rule 26(f) conference. The parties may stipulate to a shorter or longer time under Rule 29, or the court may order one (Rule 34(b)(2)(A)).

Rule 6(a)(1) governs counting: exclude the day of the triggering event, count every day including intermediate Saturdays, Sundays and legal holidays, and include the last day. If the last day is a Saturday, Sunday or legal holiday, the period runs to the next day that is not one (Rule 6(a)(1)(A)–(C)).

Rule 6(d) adds 3 days only after service under Rule 5(b)(2)(C) (mail), (D) (leaving with the clerk) or (F) (other means consented to); Rule 5(b)(2)(E) is not on that list. Under Rule 6(b)(1), good cause is required for an extension. Before expiration, the court may act with or without motion or notice if it acts or a request is made before the deadline; after expiration, a motion and excusable neglect are also required.

Respond to each item and complete production

For each item or category, Rule 34(b)(2)(B) requires the response either to state that inspection and related activities will be permitted as requested, or to state with specificity the grounds for objecting, including the reasons. The responding party may say it will produce copies instead of permitting inspection, and must then complete production by the inspection time in the request or another reasonable time specified in the response.

Unless the parties stipulate or the court orders otherwise, Rule 34(b)(2)(E) sets these defaults:

• Organization: produce documents as they are kept in the usual course of business, or organize and label them to correspond to the categories in the request (Rule 34(b)(2)(E)(i)).
• ESI form: if the request specifies no form, produce ESI in a form in which it is ordinarily maintained or in a reasonably usable form (Rule 34(b)(2)(E)(ii)).
• One form: a party need not produce the same ESI in more than one form (Rule 34(b)(2)(E)(iii)).

If the responding party objects to a requested form, or no form was specified, Rule 34(b)(2)(D) requires the response to state the form or forms it intends to use.

Rule 34 does not mention Bates numbers; Bates numbering is a practical identification aid, not a mandated format.

Federal objections and missing documents

Rule 34(b)(2)(C) sets two requirements for objections. An objection must state whether any responsive materials are being withheld on the basis of that objection. An objection to part of a request must specify the part and permit inspection of the rest. For objection grounds and sample language across written discovery, see the discovery objections cheat sheet.

Privilege, work product and confidentiality are different mechanisms:

• Privilege and trial-preparation protection: when information is withheld on that basis, Rule 26(b)(5)(A) requires the party to make the claim expressly and to describe the nature of what is withheld in a way that lets other parties assess the claim without revealing protected information. Rule 26(b)(3)(A) ordinarily protects documents and tangible things prepared in anticipation of litigation or for trial by or for another party or its representative. Subject to Rule 26(b)(4), they may be discovered if otherwise discoverable under Rule 26(b)(1) and the requesting party shows substantial need to prepare its case and cannot, without undue hardship, obtain their substantial equivalent by other means. Rule 26(b)(3)(B) requires protection of attorney or representative mental impressions, conclusions, opinions and legal theories if discovery is ordered.
• Confidentiality: a party may move for a protective order under Rule 26(c)(1) for good cause. Rule 26(c)(1)(G) lists an order that a trade secret or other confidential research, development or commercial information not be revealed or be revealed only in a specified way.

If responsive records cannot be found, the written response is still required, because Rule 34(b)(2)(B) calls for a response to each item or category. Rule 34 has no inability-to-comply statement like California’s. Recording where and how you searched is a recommended firm practice, not a federal requirement.

Rule 37(d)(1)(A)(ii) allows the court, on motion, to order sanctions if a party properly served with a Rule 34 request fails to serve its written response. The motion must certify that the movant conferred or attempted to confer in good faith to obtain the response without court action (Rule 37(d)(1)(B)). Under Rule 37(d)(2), the failure is not excused because the discovery was objectionable unless a protective-order motion is pending.

California state-court rules are different

This section covers ordinary unlimited civil cases under the California Code of Civil Procedure (CCP). Limited civil cases and unlawful detainer actions have exceptions, noted below but not developed here.

Demand contents and separate deadlines

Unless limited by court order, California discovery reaches nonprivileged matters relevant to the pending action’s subject matter or a motion in that action, if admissible in evidence or apparently reasonably calculated to lead to discovery of admissible evidence (CCP 2017.010). A party may demand inspection of documents, tangible things, land or other property, and ESI in another party’s possession, custody or control (CCP 2031.010(a)–(e)).

Under CCP 2031.030, each set is numbered consecutively and identifies the demanding party, set number and responding party (2031.030(a)(1), (b)). Each demand is separately set out by number or letter, designates items by describing each one or reasonably particularizing each category, and specifies a reasonable place, the activity and its manner, including whether it will permanently alter or destroy the item (2031.030(c)(1), (3), (4)). The inspection time must ordinarily be at least 30 days after service (2031.030(c)(2)). A demand may specify ESI forms (2031.030(a)(2)).

The written response is due within 30 days after service unless the court has changed the time (CCP 2031.260(a)). Parties may agree to extend the inspection date, the response date, or both, if confirmed in a writing (CCP 2031.270(a)–(b)). These are separate clocks.

Service adds time differently from the federal rules. Ordinary mail generally adds five calendar days when both mailing and address are within California, subject to statutory exceptions; interstate, international and address-confidentiality-program mail have different periods (CCP 1013(a)). Electronic service made before January 1, 2027 generally adds two court days (CCP 1010.6(a)(3)(B)–(C)); under Assembly Bill 540 (Stats. 2026, ch. 263), electronic service made on or after that date adds none. Either way, electronic service sent on a noncourt day is deemed made the next court day (CCP 1010.6(a)(4)). The California discovery deadlines guide works through both rules with dated examples. Counting follows CCP 12 and 12a(a), not Rule 6.

In unlawful detainer actions and other proceedings under Chapter 4 of Title 3 of Part 3, special provisions apply (CCP 2031.030(c)(2); CCP 2031.260(b)).

Compliance, inability to comply and objections

Under CCP 2031.210(a)(1)–(3), (c), the response addresses each item separately with a statement of compliance, a representation of inability to comply, or an objection, numbered and sequenced to match the demand. A statement of compliance must say production will be allowed in whole or in part and that all responsive, non-objected-to documents in the party’s possession, custody or control will be included (CCP 2031.220).

A representation of inability under CCP 2031.230 must affirm that a diligent search and reasonable inquiry were made, specify whether the item never existed, was destroyed, lost, misplaced or stolen, or has never been or is no longer in the party’s possession, custody or control, and give the name and address of anyone known or believed to have it.

An objection must identify with particularity what is withheld, state the extent of and specific ground for the objection, and name the privilege or assert work product expressly (CCP 2031.240(b)(1)–(2)). If part is objectionable, the response must address the remainder (2031.240(a)). A privilege or work-product objection must provide enough factual information to evaluate it, including a privilege log if necessary (2031.240(c)(1)).

Verification and document identification

The responding party signs the response under oath unless it contains only objections (CCP 2031.250(a)). The attorney signs any response that contains an objection (2031.250(c)). The attorney’s signature does not replace the party’s oath where (a) applies.

Produced documents must be identified with the specific request number they respond to (CCP 2031.280(a)), and produced on the demanded date unless that date is objected to, or on the date agreed under CCP 2031.270 if extended (2031.280(b)). The ESI form rules appear in 2031.280(c)–(d).

A party that fails to serve a timely response waives objections, including privilege and work product. The court may relieve the party on motion if it later served a substantially compliant response and the failure resulted from mistake, inadvertence or excusable neglect (CCP 2031.300(a)(1)–(2)).

Examples of focused requests and responses

The following examples are invented to illustrate drafting choices, not forms for use without case-specific review.

Federal request for termination communications

Naming custodians, a period and a subject is one way to describe a category with reasonable particularity (Rule 34(b)(1)(A)). The request also uses the optional ESI form specification (Rule 34(b)(1)(C)). The response says what will be produced and when (Rule 34(b)(2)(B)) and that no responsive materials are withheld on the basis of an objection (Rule 34(b)(2)(C)). Enforceability depends on the case.

California response when the plaintiff has never held the photographs

The response covers each element of CCP 2031.230: diligent search and reasonable inquiry, the specific reason, and holder information (none known or believed here). It bears the demand’s number (CCP 2031.210(c)). Because it is not only objections, the party signs under oath (CCP 2031.250(a)).

Draft responses and prepare production with Briefpoint

Briefpoint drafts responses and objections to requests for production. The output is editable in Microsoft Word, and attorneys keep final review. For a broader overview, see software for drafting discovery responses.

Autodoc finds responsive documents, adds page-level Bates citations and builds a Bates-numbered production package. Client Bridge sends clients plain-language questions through a secure link so they can answer and upload documents for attorney review. For plaintiff firms responding with client-held records, Client Bridge supports collection for attorney review.

Software output is a draft for attorney review. It does not determine whether a response is legally sufficient or guarantee that collection is complete.

Book a demo to see Briefpoint.

See Briefpoint in the video below:

FAQs About Requests for Production

Can you serve a request for production on a nonparty?

Rule 34 describes requests that one party serves on another party. For nonparties, Rule 34(c) provides that, as provided in Rule 45, a nonparty may be compelled to produce documents and tangible things or to permit an inspection. Rule 45’s procedure is outside this guide.

Is there a limit on requests for production in California?

In ordinary unlimited civil cases, these production statutes set no fixed demand limit; protective orders remain available for good cause under CCP 2031.060(b). In limited civil cases governed by CCP 91, subject to its exceptions, CCP 94(a) permits a combined 35 interrogatories, production demands and requests for admission per adverse party, with no subparts for interrogatories or admissions. CCP 95 addresses additional discovery.

Can a request for production require entry onto land?

Yes, in federal practice. Rule 34(a)(2) permits a request to enter designated land or other property possessed or controlled by the responding party, to inspect, measure, survey, photograph, test or sample the property or any designated object or operation on it. Rule 34(b)(1)(B) requires the request to specify a reasonable time, place and manner.

Do California responses containing only objections need verification?

No. Under CCP 2031.250(a), the responding party signs under oath unless the response contains only objections. Under 2031.250(c), the attorney signs any response that contains an objection. A response that adds a statement of compliance or a representation of inability to comply goes beyond objections, so the party’s oath under subdivision (a) is not excused.

Must electronically stored information be produced in more than one format?

Generally no. Unless otherwise stipulated or ordered, Rule 34(b)(2)(E)(iii) says a party need not produce the same ESI in more than one form. If the request specifies no form, Rule 34(b)(2)(E)(ii) calls for a form in which it is ordinarily maintained or a reasonably usable form, and Rule 34(b)(2)(D) requires the response to state the intended form.

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.

READ MORE

How to Develop a Relationship with AI Built on Trust

READ MORE

Practice Pointers: Written Discovery

READ MORE