Rule 34 – Be Specific!


EDRM contributes to new Exterro guide on e-discovery and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

Rule 34 is directly tied to Rule 26(d)(2), which sets down the timing for a discovery request, effectively starting the race to find the facts of a case, and in turn giving the parties insight into what their litigation strategy might be going into the meet-and-confer conference. However, just because you get there first doesn’t mean you’ll win. Especially if you arrive unprepared.

In this resource published by Exterro, multiple experts contribute perspectives on Rule 34. John Rabiej, director of the Duke Center for Judicial Studies, offers commentary on the specificity requirement for discovery requests. “Before 2015, the defendant had several months to act on discovery,” said Rabiej. “Time that was used to learn the case and begin planning for comprehensive discovery, which often involved multiple locations, custodians, and systems. Under the 2015 amendments, defendants have only 21 days after being served to begin working on discovery. The message is clear that lawyers must be prepared to move on Day 1.”

Read Rabiej’s article and perspectives from Xavier Rodriguez, U.S. District Judge, Western District of Texas, John Facciola, Ret. Magistrate Judge, U.S. Disctrict Court for the District of Columbia, and others in the full publication on Exterro’s site: https://www.exterro.com/frcp-e-discovery-guide/


Melinda Vaughn

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.