Interrogatories--You have An Obligation to Respond in Good Faith

more+
less-

Imagine this: At the beginning of the case you serve interrogatories asking basic information about your case. Thirty-five (35) days later you receive responses that state for every interrogatory:

“"Vague, ambiguous, overbroad, burdensome, oppressive, not likely to lead to admissible evidence and the information is equally accessible to the defendant. Plaintiff further objects on the grounds of attorney client privilege and the work product doctrine. See Nacht & Lewis Architect, Inc. v. Superior Court (1996) 47 CA4th 214"

Does this sound all too familiar? The frustration level is high with attorneys as it will take at a minimum 121 days to get basic information if you have to file a motion to compel further responses. Meanwhile the court is scheduling a trial date and your discovery train hasn't even left the station.

The purpose of discovery is to take the “game” element out of trial preparation by enabling the parties to obtain evidence necessary to evaluate and resolve their dispute before a trial is necessary. Weil and Brown, Cal Prac. Guide: Civil Procedure Before Trial (TRG 2009) ¶ 8:1, citing Greyhound Corp. v. Superior Court (1961). Unfortunately, now it appears the call of the wild is “Let the games begin” as the dreaded process unfolds.

It is time to rethink how you respond to interrogatories and what you can do if you do get the above response.

LOADING PDF: If there are any problems, click here to download the file.