Oct 31 2007
Form Interrogatories
This, obviously, is not an employment-law-specific topic, but it is one that I confront so often that I would like to talk about it. As you probably know, the California Judicial Council has produced sets of Form Interrogatories designed, in their opinion, to facilitate the discovery of certain basic information, and has even been kind enough to produce certain area-specific forms, like Employment Law.
But these forms seem to confuse the hell out of us licensed Juris Doctor holding folk.
First, some people maintain that these Interrogatories are “objection proof.” I have received more than a few “meet and confer” letters where my objections to Form Interrogatories were scoffed at in such a manner.Let me just set up a few reductio ad absurdum examples: if they’re objection proof does that mean that they compel the disclosure of attorney-client privileged information? There is no exception in the Discovery Act exempting these Form Interrogatories from the requirement that they be reasonably calculated to lead to admissible evidence, either. So, don’t ask me if my client is a corporation, partnership, LLC, or unincorporated association if you know you’re suing a natural person.
Second, while I would say that it’s a tough case to make that you the Form Interrogatories are objectionable as to form, it’s at least possible that in certain cases they might be. I take a dim view of that, though. I’ve never seen such a case, but I’ve seen pages of boilerplate objections to Form Interrogatories on form bases. “Compound” is my favorite. (wtf?)
Third, please don’t send me Form Interrogatories (General) and Form Interrogatories (Employment) and check boxes that ask for identical information and expect me to respond twice. You’re entitled to the information–you’re not entitled to it with whipped cream and a cherry on top. True there are some that look deceptively similar that actually do ask for different information, but many are in fact identical.
I understand the concept of zealous representation. I understand that that requires, at least to some, that discovery games be played. But really, the definition of zealous doesn’t include stupid.
The use of the Judicial Council Forms should be abolished in Unlimited Civil cases, where they have become some kind of stupid potion, and a vehicle for abuse. Or, at the very least, they should count against the limit of 35.
Tags: discovery | litigation.
Related posts
I can think of one example where an objection to form may be appropriate, namely, in a case where the application of the specific Form Interrogatory to the Parties’ dispute is ambiguous or unintelligible.
An example of this is Form Interrogatories 14.1 and 14.2, which seem to ask for information related to a negligence per se claim. However, in case where there is no negligence, but where there is an alleged statutory claim, 14.1 would seem to apply, but is really ambiguous as to its application in the context of the Parties’ dispute.
Other examples include personal injury related interrogatories propounded to an entity.
Similarly, when a party applies its own definitions as allowed in Form Interrogatories, and those definitions are ill-conceived, the resulting “Mad Libs” Form Interrogatories can lead to ambiguous, and sometimes absurd, results. One example of this is when a party defines the “incident” without a time-frame, and propounds Form Interrogatories based on a specific time period.
That’s the exception-that-proves-the-rule point, I think. (;
Judicial Council forms are great for pro pers, and often come in handy for practitioners, but it’s hard to abuse a subpoena form. The Interrogatories need to go.
Jon-Erik,
Actually, the fact that the Judicial Counsel Form Rogs are not bullet-proof has been established by Nacht & Lewis Architects, Inc. v. Superior Court (1996)
47 Cal.App.4th 214, holding that general form rogs 12.2 and 12.3 violate the work product doctrine and attorney client privilege.
At CalBizLit, I posted a white paper this morning on drafting and responding to written discovery in California. I’ll add a link to your post.
Bruce Nye
Objections to Form Interrogatories…
Just a few hours after posting my white paper on written discovery, I encountered this post at Storm’s Employment Law, criticizing the abuse of form interrogatories and raising the issue whether these interrogatories — approved by the California Judi…
forum.facka.ru.txt;2;9