Rule 34 PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS AND THINGS AND ENTRY UPON LAND FOR INSPECTION AND OTHER PURPOSES.

• Jurisdiction: Colorado

Rule 34. Production of Documents and Things and Entry Upon Land for Inspection and Other Purposes.

(a) Scope. Subject to the limitations contained in the Case Management Order, a party may serve on any other party a request:

(1) To produce and permit the party making the request, or someone acting on the party's behalf, to inspect and copy any designated documents (including writings, drawings, graphs, charts, photographs, phono-records, and other data compilations from which information can be obtained, translated, if necessary, by the respondent through detection devices into reasonably usable form), or to inspect and copy, test, or sample any tangible things which constitute or contain matters within the scope of C.R.C.P. 26 (b) and which are in the possession, custody, or control of the party upon whom the request is served; or

(2) To permit entry upon designated land or other property in the possession or control of the party upon whom the request is served for the purpose of inspection and measuring, surveying, photographing, testing, or sampling the property or any designated object or operation thereon, within the scope of C.R.C.P. 26 (b).

(b) Procedure. The request shall set forth the items to be inspected either by individual item or by category, and describe each item or category with reasonable particularity. The request shall specify a reasonable time, place, and manner of making the inspection and performing the related acts.

The party upon whom the request is served shall serve a written response within 35 days after the service of the request. A shorter or longer time may be directed by the court or agreed to in writing by the parties pursuant to C.R.C.P. 29. The response shall state, with respect to each item or category, that inspection and related activities will be permitted as requested, or state with specificity the grounds for objecting to the request. The responding party may state that it will produce copies of information instead of permitting inspection. The production must then be completed no later than the time for inspection stated in the request or another reasonable time stated in the response. An objection must state whether any responsive materials are being withheld on the basis of that objection. If objection is made to part of an item or category, the part shall be specified. A timely objection to a request for production stays the obligation to produce which is the subject of the objection until the court resolves the objection. No separate motion for protective order pursuant to C.R.C.P. 26 (c) is required. The party submitting the request may move for an order pursuant to C.R.C.P. 37 (a) with respect to any objection to or other failure to respond to the request or any part thereof, or any failure to permit inspection as requested.

A party who produces documents for inspection shall produce them as they are kept in the usual course of business or shall organize and label them to correspond with the categories in the request.

(c) Persons Not Parties. As provided in C.R.C.P. 45, this Rule does not preclude an independent action against a person not a party for production of documents and things and permission to enter upon land.

Source: (a) and (b) amended and adopted effective April 14, 1994, effective January 1, 1995, for all cases filed on or after that date; committee comment approved June 10, 1994; committee comment corrected and effective January 9, 1995; (b) 2supnd/sup paragraph amended and adopted December 14, 2011, effective January 1, 2012, for all cases pending on or filed on or after January 1, 2012, pursuant to C.R.C.P. 1(b); (b) and (c) and comments amended and adopted May 28, 2015, effective July 1, 2015, for cases filed on or after July 1, 2015.

Cross references: For scope of discovery, see C.R.C.P. 26(b); for inspection of mines, see § 34-50-105, C.R.S.; for protective orders concerning discovery, see C.R.C.P. 26(c); for motion for order compelling discovery, see C.R.C.P. 37(a); for parties, see C.R.C.P. 17 to 25, chapter 3.

COMMENTS

1995

[1] Revised C.R.C.P. 34 now interrelates with the differential case management features of C.R.C.P. 16 and C.R.C.P. 26. Because of mandatory disclosure, substantially less discovery is needed.

[2] A discovery schedule for the case is required by C.R.C.P. 16(b)(1)(IV). Under the requirements of that Rule, the parties must set forth in the Case Management Order the timing and number of requests for production and the basis for the necessity of such discovery with attention to the presumptive limitation and standards set forth in C.R.C.P. 26(b)(2). There is also the requirement that counsel certify they have advised their clients of the estimated expenses and fees involved in the discovery. Discovery is thus tailored to the particular case. The parties in the first instance and ultimately the Court are responsible for setting reasonable limits and preventing abuse.

2015

[3] Rule 34 is changed to adopt similar revisions as those proposed to Fed. R. Civ. P. 34, which are designed to make responses to requests for documents more meaningful and transparent. The first amendment is to avoid the practice of repeating numerous boilerplate objections to each request which do not identify specifically what is objectionable about each specific request. The second amendment is to allow production of documents in place of permitting inspection but to require that the production be scheduled to occur when the response to the document request is due, or some other specific and reasonable date. The third amendment is to require that when an objection to a document request is made, the response must also state whether, in fact, any responsive materials are being withheld due to that objection. The fourth and final amendment is simply to clarify that a written objection to production under this Rule is adequate to stop...