Jump to content

4 Cross-Defendants, 4 Discovery, How Many Motions To Compel Further Discovery?


Recommended Posts

Scenario:

 

4 cross-defendants.  4 sets of discovery and insufficient responses (Admissions, RFP's, Interrogatories).  Then Meet and Confer's etc.

 

 

How many hearings, how many motions would that consist of?

 

Would it be three motions per cross defendant (one each for Admissions/RFP's/Interrogatories)?

 

Would it be one motion per Discovery part (i.e., all 4 cross-defendants for admissions, all 4 CD's for interrogatories, etc).

 

 

One for each would be 12 hearings.   Combining them would be 1-3 hearings.

 

12 motions/hearings would be A LOT of time effort and court fees.  1-3 hearings seems like they would be huge ugly messy motions (because have to list out the discovery requests, responses, why further response is required, etc)

 

 

Obvioulsy one doesn't HAVE to do motions to compel on all 4 cross-defendants, to cut down on the work load, but I'm not clear on how to think about this.   Seems like 12 motions/hearings would piss off a judge as they're all basically the same short of some minor variance, but 3 motions would be big and ugly...

 

 

So I can think about this rightly, any thoughts, advice, suggestions?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

File all of your rogs on each person on the same day, hope one or two of them do not complete the rogs then file a motion to deem admitted, or a motion to preclude.

 

This way you will not give them any more time to work on their case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That sounds like a big mess. 1 defendant could draft a motion to compel RFP's, a motion to deem admissions admitted, and a motion to compel ROG's and file them with the court, scheduled for a motion hearing for all 3 motions on the same day. The other 3 defendants could do the same. That would give you 4 defendant's filing 3 motions each with 1 hearing date for each defendant. So, it's 4 hearings and 12 motions.

 

Each defendant could draft the RFP's, ROG's, and Admissions all in 1 motion (making it 4 motions), but it is best if each motion is separate (and has an attached order written for the judge to sign), that way if you only win 1 motion it is easier to get the order signed (as you would have a separate order for each motion)

 

A perfect example of why it is often important to keep discovery simple (possibly just requesting 4  or 5 documents in  a RFP's). It is hard to come up with a better answer not knowing what the discovery was, more about the case, or the bottom feeder's objections, but that's my opinion anyway. Good Luck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lo and behold, 4 cross defendants instead of 1 certainly does...uhmm...add to the work load.

 

It seems that it would be best to have each motion be separate, and organizing it into 3 motions for 1 cross-defendant at one hearing makes the most sense.   I like the 4 hearings/12 motions option.

 

 

That's a great answer, thanks all, thanks Anon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If this is California state Court, I am afraid you will need a separate motion for each discovery response.  That means 12 motions. 

 

It won't really be 12 hearings in all likihood.  The Court will probably hear all of the motions at the same time.  And your discovery to each cross-defendant is probably the same.  Their responses may differ but most likely they just found different words to say "No."

 

One thing you might consider is to meet and confer on all discovery but just file motions to compel the RFPs.  Personally, I think Rogs are a waste of time and really don't use them much anymore.  If I do use them, it is only for something I am willing to go to the mat on like:  Identify the date on which you contend defendant defaulted on the account at issue in this lawsuit.  Any Judge will give you that.  Especially if it is just one Rog and the documents produced don't tell you the answer.  Plus, you never know.  Cross defendants may agree to supplement their responses after you meet and confer.

 

Even if you file one motion for RFPs for each defendant, it will be a lot of work to move to compel.  You will have to do 4 different separate statements alone.  That is a lot of typing.

 

And you will have a very short time within which to read the opposition briefs and prepare your reply briefs.  They probably won't send them express mail as the code requires so you will really be short of time.

 

Good luck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe you could file a motion on behalf of all 4 defendants (I don't know without the case specifics), but that would probably have to be a situation where all  RFA's etc. and objections were the same for each defendant. Like I said, a mess. I would think that each defendant (although they can work together) is basically on their own to defend (or ignore) the case, and that some would do discovery, and some would not.

 

A cross defendant would fight the case as if he/she were the only defendant and the case is on their shoulders, and fight accordingly, whichever one of the defendants does not do this would probably be the one stuck with the ruling. I don't know much about your case, but I would think you have good leverage with your cross-complaint to get a dismissal (at some point).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

.  Personally, I think Rogs are a waste of time and really don't use them much anymore.  If I do use them, it is only for something I am willing to go to the mat on like:  Identify the date on which you contend defendant defaulted on the account at issue in this lawsuit.  Any Judge will give you that. 

I usually think the same, but that is a pretty good one you listed there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If this is California state Court, I am afraid you will need a separate motion for each discovery response.  That means 12 motions. 

 

It won't really be 12 hearings in all likihood.  The Court will probably hear all of the motions at the same time.  And your discovery to each cross-defendant is probably the same.  Their responses may differ but most likely they just found different words to say "No."

 

One thing you might consider is to meet and confer on all discovery but just file motions to compel the RFPs.  Personally, I think Rogs are a waste of time and really don't use them much anymore.  If I do use them, it is only for something I am willing to go to the mat on like:  Identify the date on which you contend defendant defaulted on the account at issue in this lawsuit.  Any Judge will give you that.  Especially if it is just one Rog and the documents produced don't tell you the answer.  Plus, you never know.  Cross defendants may agree to supplement their responses after you meet and confer.

 

Even if you file one motion for RFPs for each defendant, it will be a lot of work to move to compel.  You will have to do 4 different separate statements alone.  That is a lot of typing.

 

And you will have a very short time within which to read the opposition briefs and prepare your reply briefs.  They probably won't send them express mail as the code requires so you will really be short of time.

 

Good luck.

 

 

No combining motions, ok.

 

The discovery isn't exactly the same to all Cross-defendants, but there's a fair amount of similarity, which has me think it's A LOT of very similar motions/hearings for basically 'their response is inadequate, please make them respod adequately'

 

I'm not yet at the compel point, as have to meet and confer etc, so just getting my ducks in a row and plan accordingly.  But yes, it does seem like a lot of typing/effort for not a whole lot of return....

 

I think I'll do all the meet and confers as it's good experience for me and time/effort for them, see what happens and what I get back, and minimize the number of motions to compel.

 

 

1.  Do I have to ask them in the meet and confer's for extension of time to 'compel' their inadaquate response, or is that already built into the meet and confer process (I don't think it does)?  Seems like I have X amount of time to compel, and meet and confer back and forth is in the middle there...

 

2.  If they don't overnight the opposition briefs, is there anything to do about that?  I know it's common for things to just be sent regular mail (like signing the proof of service and putting it in with the docs and then mailing it), so don't know if it's 'accepted' method, or if one can get them for it somehow.  (All our previous oppositions and replies to other motions we've done we've just sent regular mail.)  My guess is there's nothing to do about it, or it's not worth doing anything about it time/effort-wise.  Agree/disagree?

 

 

 

Thanks, I really appreciate (all of yours and everybody's) time and effort helping/responding to me (and everybody else here on the forum).  All and all I'm 2+ years into this case, and I'm doing fine, and much of that is because of this forum. Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ask for an extension if they agree to supplement.  Plan on them not giving you one.

 

Calendar your last day to file a motion to compel and make sure you require them to respond to your meet and confer well in advance of that date (you can also tell them you are willing to give them more time to respond to your meet and confer if they give you an extension of time to move to compel.)

 

You will make an argument in your reply brief that the opposition should not be considered because they violated the rule.  THe Court will probably consider it anyway, but plaintiff will get a tongue-lashing and the Court will likely cut you some slack on your reply (especially if it has to be late).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.. For more information, please see our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.