Motion to compel further responses to interrogatories in United States District Court

Motion to compel further responses to interrogatories in United States District Court is the topic of this blog post.

A motion to compel further responses to interrogatories in United States District Court is filed when one party has served written interrogatories on the opposing party, and the opposing party has failed to serve any meaningful responses to written interrogatories, or has interposed boilerplate objections.

Statutory authorization for a motion to compel further responses to interrogatories in United States District Court.

A motion to compel further responses to interrogatories in United States District Court is authorized under the provisions of Rule 37 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Rule 37 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure states in pertinent part that,

“(a) Motion for an Order Compelling Disclosure or Discovery.

(1) In General. On notice to other parties and all affected persons, a party may move for an order compelling disclosure or discovery. The motion must include a certification that the movant has in good faith conferred or attempted to confer with the person or party failing to make disclosure or discovery in an effort to obtain it without court action.

(2) Appropriate Court. A motion for an order to a party must be made in the court where the action is pending. A motion for an order to a nonparty must be made in the court where the discovery is or will be taken.

(3) Specific Motions.

… (B) To Compel a Discovery Response. A party seeking discovery may move for an order compelling an answer, designation, production, or inspection. This motion may be made if:

(iii) a party fails to answer an interrogatory submitted under Rule 33..

(4) Evasive or Incomplete Disclosure, Answer, or Response. For purposes of this subdivision (a), an evasive or incomplete disclosure, answer, or response must be treated as a failure to disclose, answer, or respond.”

Several published decisions have stated that when an interrogatory legitimately requests factual support, it is incumbent upon the responding party to provide an answer with relevant, supporting facts, and that the grounds for objecting  to an interrogatory must be stated with specificity.

Meet and confer requirement before filing a motion to compel further responses to interrogatories in United States District Court.

There is a meet and confer requirement that must be met before filing a motion to compel further responses to interrogatories in United States District Court as Rule 37 requires the movant to include a certification that the movant has “in good faith conferred or attempted to confer” with the party resisting discovery before seeking judicial intervention.

The party filing a motion may request sanctions under Rule 37(a)(5)(A) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 37(a)(5) which governs motions to compel and the payment of expenses. Rule 37(a)(5)(A) states that “[i]f the motion is granted . . . the court must, after giving an opportunity to be heard, require the party or deponent whose conduct necessitated the motion, . . . to pay the movant’s reasonable expenses incurred in making the motion, including attorney’s fees.”

The Advisory Committee Notes discussing Rule 37(a) emphasize that “expenses should ordinarily be awarded unless a court finds that the losing party acted justifiably in carrying this point to court.” Id. Advisory Comm. Notes, 1970 Amend. This provision “presses the court to address itself to abusive [discovery] practices.” Id.

Sample motion to compel further responses to interrogatories in United States District Court for sale.

Attorneys or parties that would like to view a portion of a 15 page sample motion to compel further responses to interrogatories in United States District Court containing brief instructions, a memorandum of points and authorities with citations to case law and statutory authority, sample declaration and proof of service sold by the author can see below.

 

The author of this blog post, Stan Burman, is a freelance paralegal who has worked in California and Federal litigation since 1995 and has created over 300 sample legal documents for sale.

Over 300 sample legal documents for California and Federal litigation for sale.

To view more information on over 300 sample legal documents for California and Federal litigation visit: https://legaldocspro.myshopify.com/products

For licensed attorneys and law firms that need assistance with any California or Federal litigation matters, Mr.  Burman is available on a freelance basis. Mr. Burman may be contacted by e-mail at DivParalgl@yahoo.com for more information. He accepts payments through PayPal which means that you can pay using most credit or debit cards.

Do you want to use this article on your website, blog or e-zine? You can, as long as you include this blurb with it: “Stan Burman is the author of over 300 sample legal documents for California and Federal litigation and is the author of a free weekly legal newsletter. You can receive 10 free gifts just for subscribing. Just visit http://freeweeklylegalnewsletter.gr8.com/ for more information.

Follow Stan Burman on Google Plus at:

https://plus.google.com/+StanBurman

DISCLAIMER:

Please note that the author of this blog post, Stan Burman is NOT an attorney and as such is unable to provide any specific legal advice. The author is NOT engaged in providing any legal, financial, or other professional services, and any information contained in this blog post is NOT intended to constitute legal advice.

The materials and information contained in this blog post have been prepared by Stan Burman for informational purposes only and are not legal advice. Transmission of the information contained in this blog post is not intended to create, and receipt does not constitute, any business relationship between the author and any readers. Readers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Summary
Article Name
Motion to compel further responses to interrogatories in United States District Court
Description
A motion to compel further responses to interrogatories in United States District Court is the topic of this blog post.
Author