Standard responses, objections, and answers to interrogatories for defendants and plaintiffs

[Style of Case]

DEFINITIONS

1. "Propounding party," "you," and "your" means _____.

2. "Respondent(s)" means _____.

3. "Your attorney" means _____.

4. "Respondent’s attorney" means _____.

5. "Rule" or "Rules" means the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure.

6. "R.C.E." means the Texas Rules of Civil Evidence.

7. "This lawsuit" means Cause No. _____, referenced more particularly in the style above.

8. "The incident" means _____.

9. "Information" means knowledge, facts, information, and/or documents.

   USE NOTE : Although this form is drafted for use in state court in Texas, with minor modifications, these objections can be used in state court in other jurisdictions, as well as in federal court. At the very least, it is a handy checklist for potential objections in federal courts and state courts outside of Texas.

   GENERAL OBJECTIONS TO INTERROGATORIES

   USE NOTE: General objections are usually disfavored by Texas state courts. I have included the following standard general objections should you wish to plead them. Further, assertions of privilege must satisfy Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 193.3.

1. Respondent objects to responding to any interrogatory seeking information or documents covered by the attorney work product privilege as violating Rule 192.5.

   USE NOTE: Party communication privilege is now subsumed in the attorney work product privilege.

   USE NOTE: Rule 193.3(c) allows a party to withhold privileged communications or documents under certain circumstances without advising the propounding party that information is being withheld and the privilege asserted as required under 193.3(a).

2. Respondent objects to responding to any interrogatory seeking information or documents prepared by Respondent in anticipation of litigation and covered by the investigative privilege as violating Rule 192.5.

   Subject to the foregoing general objection, without waiving same: Respondent will produce Respondent’s investigation file that existed prior to the date:

   (a) Respondent had reason to anticipate this litigation;

   (b) This case was assigned to Respondent’s attorneys; and/or

   (c) Respondent received a letter from you or your attorney presenting the claims you are making in this lawsuit.

3. Respondent objects to any interrogatory seeking information or documents covered by the attorney/client communication privilege as violating Rule 192.5 and R.C.E. 503(b).

4. Respondent objects to any interrogatory seeking information or documents covered by the consulting expert exception as violating Rules 192.3(e) and 195, cmt. 1.

5. Respondent objects to any interrogatory seeking information or documents covered by the party communication privilege.

   OBJECTIONS TO INSTRUCTIONS AND DEFINITIONS

1. Respondent objects to propounding party's definitions and instructions to the extent they purport to place duties and requirements on Respondent that exceed those required by the Rules in violation of Rule 192.3.

2. Respondent objects to the definition of "document" on the grounds that it is overly broad and exceeds the permissible scope of discovery permitted by the Rules in violation of Rule 192.3. Respondent further objects to the extent the definition seeks documents and information that are irrelevant to any material issue in this lawsuit in violation of Rule 192.3.

3. Respondent objects to the definition of "identify" and "identifying" on the grounds that it is overly broad and exceeds the permissible scope of discovery permitted by the Rules in violation of Rule 192.3.

   USE NOTE: Rule 192.3(b) allows the discovery of the existence, description, nature, custody, condition, location, and contents of documents and tangible things.

4. Respondent objects to the definition of _____ on the grounds that it is overly broad and exceeds the permissible scope of discovery permitted by the Rules in violation of Rule 192.3.

5. Respondent objects to [instruction/definition] number _____ on the grounds that it is overly broad and exceeds the permissible scope of discovery permitted by the rules in violation of Rule 192.3.

6. Respondent objects to [instruction/definition] number _____ on the grounds that it is overly broad and, if followed, would necessitate more than 25/50 answers to interrogatories in violation of Rules 192.3 and 190.

7. Respondent objects to [instruction/definition] number _____ on the grounds that it is overly broad and exceeds the permissible scope of discovery permitted by the Rules in violation of Rule 192.3.

8. Objection. As worded, the interrogatories contain multiple questions, compound questions, and subparts that necessitate more than 25/50 answers to interrogatories in violation of Rule 190.

9. Respondent objects to [instruction/definition] no. _____, regarding the identity of witnesses Respondent “may or will” call on the grounds that it violates Rule 192.3(d).

   Objection. Beyond the scope permitted or required by the Rules in violation of Rule 192.3(d).

   Subject to these objections, and without waiving same, Respondent will provide the name and last known home or business address and last known home or business telephone number of any person who is expected to be called to testify at trial.

10. Respondent objects to [instruction/definition] no. _____ as not required by the Rules.

    Objection. Beyond the scope permitted or required by the Rules in violation of Rule 192.3.

    Objection. Improper because "information" is not in a question format as required by the Rules.

    Objection. [Instruction/definition] no. _____ does not describe what "information" is defined or requested.

    Objection. Overly broad and global and not properly limited in time, scope, and relation to the facts at issue in this lawsuit in violation of Rule 192.3.

11. Respondent objects to [instruction/definition] no. _____ as overly broad and global and not properly limited in time, scope, and relation to the facts at issue in this lawsuit in violation of Rule 192.3.

    SPECIFIC OBJECTIONS TO INTERROGATORIES

1. Attorney/Client

   USE NOTE: Rule 192.3(b) allows the discovery of the existence, description, nature, custody, condition, location, and contents of documents and tangible things. For example, just because an attorney takes photographs of the accident site does not cloak the photos with the attorney work product privilege. Such photos would be discoverable.

   Objection. Impermissibly inquires into information protected by the attorney/client communication privilege in violation of Rule 192.5 and R.C.E. 503(b).

   Pursuant to Rule 193.3, Respondent states that information or material responsive to this interrogatory has been withheld as it is protected by this privilege.

2. Argumentative and Assumes Facts

   Objection. Argumentative and assumes fact not in evidence and/or disputed facts in violation of Rule 192.3.

   Subject to this objection and without waiving same, at this time, Respondent states generally:

3. Attorneys’ Fees

   Objection. Respondent objects to stating the type of agreement that Respondent has with Respondent’s attorney concerning attorneys’ fees as irrelevant to the subject matter of this lawsuit in violation of Rule 192.3 because Respondent is seeking recovery of reasonable and necessary attorneys’ fees, which are recoverable regardless of the fee arrangement between parties.

4. Authorization for Documents

   Objection. Overly broad and global. Not properly limited in time, scope, and relation to the facts at issue in this lawsuit in violation of Rule 192.3.

   Objection. Irrelevant to any material issue in this lawsuit and not calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence in violation of Rule 192.3.

   Objection. Impermissibly invades the personal privacy rights of Respondent in violation of the common law of Texas, Rule 192.3, the Texas Constitution and the U.S. Constitution.

   Subject to these objections, without waiving same, Respondent will produce authorization(s) properly limited in time, scope, and relation to the issues in this lawsuit, provided that you agree to provide Respondent’s attorneys with copies of all documents you obtain with any authorization provided. [OPTION:] Please sign the attached Rule 11 agreement in this regard.

5. Attorney Work Product

   USE NOTE: Rule 193.3(c) allows a party to withhold privileged communications or documents under certain circumstances without advising the propounding party that information is being withheld and the privilege asserted, as required under 193.3(a).

   Objection. Impermissibly inquires into Respondent’s attorney's work product protected by the attorney work product privilege in violation of Rule 192.5(a).

6. Collateral Source Rule

   Objection. Impermissibly inquires into information protected by the collateral source rule doctrine in violation of the common law of Texas.

   Objection. Irrelevant to any material issue in this lawsuit in violation of Rule 192.3.

7. Confidentiality Order

   Objection. Requests Respondent to create documents not already in existence and, as such, is unduly burdensome in violation of Rule 192.6(b) and is not required by the Rules, in violation of Rule 192.3(b). See In re Colonial Pipeline Co., 968 S.W.2d 938, 942 (Tex. 1998); McKinney v. National Union Fire Ins. Co., 772 S.W.2d 72, 73 n.2 (Tex. 1989); Smith v. O’Neal, 850 S.W.2d 797, 799 (Tex. App.-Houston [14^th Dist.] 1993, no writ).

   USE NOTE: Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 196.6 requires a responding party to produce all documents subject to a valid request at its own expense unless “the documents are voluminous.” In that case you “must state a reasonable time and place for the production of documents.” Rule 194.4

   Subject to these objections, without waiving same, all information and/or documents subject to this interrogatory, which are voluminous, will be provided, on the condition that you enter into a confidentiality agreement. All such documents will be made available at opposing attorney's office at a...