Hilb Rogal & Hobbs Co. v. Sellars, 2008 NCBC 12 (N.C. Super Ct. June 6, 2008)(Diaz)

The "General Objections" that many lawyers put up front in their responses to discovery requests may not be effective.  The Business Court held that such objections may violate the Rules of Civil Procedure, which require a party to state its objections in response to each interrogatory:

Rule 33 of the North Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure requires that each interrogatory “be answered separately and fully in writing under oath, unless it is objected to, in which event the reasons for objection shall be stated in lieu of an answer.” N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1, Rule 33 (2007). Moreover, “[a]n objection to an interrogatory shall be made by stating the objection and the reason therefore either in the space following the interrogatory or following the restated interrogatory.” N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1, Rule 33 (2007) (emphasis added).

The Court then stated what it said was the ruling of most federal courts on the subject of general objections:

'objections stated at the beginning of the response to the interrogatories, are ineffective and are an abuse of the discovery process because such objections block discovery without explaining why and to what extent.' Waters Edge Living, LLC v. RSUI Indem. Co., 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33049, at *11 (N.D. Fla. Apr. 22, 2008).

Full Opinion

Tags:
Trackbacks (0) Links to blogs that reference this article Trackback URL
http://www.ncbusinesslitigationreport.com/admin/trackback/73907
Comments (0) Read through and enter the discussion with the form at the end
Post A Comment / Question Use this form to add a comment to this entry.







Remember personal info?