Evidence Interrogatories Objections 
E-Discovery LLC
JULY 31, 2025
The court cited a local rule that prohibits use of definitions in interrogatories without leave of court. In pertinent part, Herman objected to the definitions in Payne’s interrogatories. b) (“A party may not separately define words used in an interrogatory without the court’s leave.”). applies only to interrogatories.
E-Discovery LLC
JULY 25, 2025
5] “The rules also require objections to interrogatories and requests for production of documents to be made with specificity.” [6] 7] “Boilerplate objections are legally meaningless and amount to a waiver of an objection.” [8] 7] “Boilerplate objections are legally meaningless and amount to a waiver of an objection.” [8]
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
E-Discovery LLC
OCTOBER 9, 2024
27, 2024), “boilerplate” objections were sustained on the specific facts presented. BOILERPLATE OBJECTIONS HAVE GENERALLY BEEN CONDEMNED Boilerplate objections have generally been condemned. See General Objections, Dracula, and “Whac a Mole” (Apr. In Jacobs v. The Journal Publishing Co., 2024 WL 4333199 (D. at 190, 192.
E-Discovery LLC
JANUARY 8, 2025
Plaintiff contended that, in response to plaintiffs interrogatories, Defendants improperly refer to hundreds of pages of documents, which is non-responsive, evasive, and in violation of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 33(d). First, it must show that a review of the documents will actually reveal answers to the interrogatories.
E-Discovery LLC
SEPTEMBER 16, 2024
It – surprisingly – sustained boilerplate objections. Information within this scope of discovery need not be admissible in evidence to be discoverable.” Interestingly, the Ho court sustained what appear to be boilerplate objections that plaintiff’s requests were “overly burdensome” and “irrelevant….”
E-Discovery LLC
FEBRUARY 23, 2025
The court permitted spoliation interrogatories. Plaintiffs supplemental response stated: Plaintiff objects to this interrogatory as compound. Defendants Interrogatory No. Plaintiffs supplemental response stated: Plaintiff objects to this interrogatory as compound.
E-Discovery LLC
FEBRUARY 8, 2025
While not the focus of this blog, it is interesting that some of the evidence of the undue influence came from graphic text messages. The Court pointed out that the right question was found in a standard form interrogatory. Standard General Interrogatory No. But it was not propounded by Joan. Rules Form No.
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
Let's personalize your content