- Emergency Consultation Services
- Risk Management Services
- Who We Are
- Our People
- What We Do
- Why We Are Different
- What’s New
- Where We Are
By: Chuck Horn
In California, for more than ten years, upon request of another party, a party has been required to provide an electronic version of its separate statement in connection with a motion for summary judgment. Since the separate statement would usually grow to three columns, covering many pages, with separate rows for citations to supporting evidence, this can be a cumbersome document. CRC 3.1350(i) made the practice of law more efficient by requiring this cooperation among counsel.
Similar cooperation has now been mandated in California in the discovery context by CCP §2030.210(d) and CCP §2033.210(e). Last year California enacted AB 1349 in order to encourage a more efficient means of discovery. AB 1349 revises CCP §2030.210 and CCP §2033.210 by adding subdivisions (d) and (e) respectively, which require that upon request by the responding party, a party who has propounded interrogatories and/or requests for admission must provide them in electronic format within three court days of the request by the responding party, if the discovery requests were created in electronic format.
CCP §2030.210(d)(2) and CCP §2033.210(e)(2) further require that upon request by the propounding party after having received responses to the interrogatories or requests for admissions, the responding party shall provide the responses in an electronic format to the propounding party within three court days. Again, this eliminates unnecessary re-typing of documents, reduces the administrative burden of practicing law, and promotes cooperation and efficiency, all to better serve our clients.
If you have questions or would like more information, please contact Chuck Horn at [email protected].