By John Ruhl and Jeffrey Tilden

Effective September 1, civil cases filed in King County Superior Court are subject to presumptive limits of 40 interrogatories, 25 requests for admission and 10 depositions. Additionally, under new Local Rule 33, the Superior Court is initiating a process for approving sets of optional pattern interrogatories for possible use in certain types of cases. The new discovery limitations do not apply to family law proceedings or post-judgment civil proceedings.

The new local civil discovery limits were developed by the KCBA Judiciary and the Courts Committee and recommended by the KCBA Board of Trustees to the Superior Court last year.

The New Limits
Under new LR 26(d)(1)(B), parties may “serve no more than 40 interrogatories, including all discrete subparts.” Depositions are limited to 10 per party “with each deposition limited to one day of seven hours; provided, that each party may conduct one deposition that shall be limited to two days and seven hours per day.” LR 26(d)(2). In addition, no party may serve “more than 25 requests for admission upon any other party in addition to requests for admission propounded to authenticate documents.” LR 26(d)(3).

Parties may modify any of these presumptive caps by written stipulation and are encouraged in such cases to develop their own discovery plan. LR 26(d)(4)(A). Alternatively, the court may grant any party’s motion to take additional discovery. LR 26(d)(4).

A party served with discovery requests violating the new limits may refuse to answer them, without obtaining a protective order. LR 26(d)(5)(B). Likewise, a party need not attend a deposition that violates the rules, subject to sufficient notice to the other parties. LR 26(d)(5)(C).

Pattern Interrogatories Eyed

Under new Local Rule 33, the Court will work with the bar to adopt a “process for approving Pattern Interrogatories for use in discrete practice areas.” New Local Rule 26(d)(1)(A) anticipates that once pattern interrogatories are adopted, a party using pattern interrogatories may serve 15 interrogatories in addition to pattern interrogatories. Such standardized discovery has been used successfully in King County asbestos litigation for many years.

Brian Esler, chair of the KCBA panel, said the committee and the Superior Court are working to develop pattern interrogatories for general commercial litigation, personal injury cases, employment law cases and family law cases, as well as possibly “relief-centric” requests that would be tailored to damages or other relief requested. The committee expects to present its recommendations to the KCBA Board within the next few months.

A Joint Effort
Adoption of the new local rules was the culmination of a long, collaborative effort. In the fall of 2003, Presiding Judge Richard Eadie asked the KCBA committee to examine methods to improve the court’s handling of its civil caseload, with emphasis on a joint bench-bar effort. The panel’s proposal, after several meetings, was to work on ideas to streamline the discovery process with the goal of lowering costs (in terms of time, money and disputes) for all involved.

Research conducted by committee members showed that Washington is one of the last Western states that has not adopted presumptive discovery limits, although local jurisdictions, such as Pierce County, have implemented discovery reforms. The committee also heard from both the plaintiff and defense bars that numerous rounds of written discovery, needless objections to proper discovery and multiple-day depositions unnecessarily were driving up the costs of trying and resolving civil cases.

The committee’s June 2004 report to the KCBA Board found that the “enormous burdens” placed on the judicial system through standard discovery practice “has not helped secure the ‘just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action.’” The committee recommended placing presumptive limits on discovery tools as one way of reducing litigation costs and streamlining the pretrial preparation process.