Describe the parties' duty to disclose under FRCP 26 and its relationship with traditional methods of discovery

Any help with this would be great.


Each party to a lawsuit has a duty to disclose to the other party specified types of information prior to the discovery stage of litigation. Under FRCP Rule 26(f), once a lawsuit is brought, the parties (the plaintiff and defendant and/or their attorneys, if the parties are represented by counsel) must schedule a prediscovery meeting to discuss the nature of the lawsuit, any defenses that may be raised against the claims being brought, and possibilities for promptly settling or otherwise resolving the dispute. The meeting should take place as soon as practicable but at least 14 days before a scheduling conference is held or a scheduling order issued. Either at this meeting or within 10 days after it, the parties must also make the initial disclosures described below and submit to the court a plan for discovery. As the trial date approaches, the attorneys must make subsequent disclosures relating to witnesses, documents, and other information that is relevant to the case.
These rules do not replace the traditional methods of discovery. Rather, the rules impose a duty on attorneys to disclose specified information automatically to opposing counsel early in the litigation process so that the time and costs of traditional discovery can be reduced. Attorneys may still use the traditional discovery tools (depositions and interrogatories, for instance) to obtain information, but they cannot use these methods until the prediscovery meeting has been held and initial disclosures have been made. Also, to save the court's time, the rules give attorneys a freer hand in crafting a discovery plan that is appropriate to the nature of the claim and the parties' needs.

Legal Studies & Paralegal

You might also like to view...

Challenges against a state constitutional provision that allowed taxation of personal property owned by a corporation but not personal property owned by individuals were evaluated

A. under the rational basis test because it did not involve a suspect class or fundamental right. B. under the intermediate scrutiny test because it involved a corporation, which is a quasi- suspect class. C. under strict scrutiny because it involved economic factors. D. None of the above.

Legal Studies & Paralegal

Often it is the paralegal who keeps the file for experts and who is responsible for finding the appropriate expert for a particular case

Indicate whether the statement is true or false

Legal Studies & Paralegal

A Boolean search:

a. Requires the researcher to enter key terms that can be identified as a concrete idea. b. Uses words such as "and", "or" and "not" are used to either connect words together or to exclude certain terms that may appear in search results that are undesirable. c. Is used when the same root word is desired with different endings. d. None of the above

Legal Studies & Paralegal

Compensation is allowed for permanent impairment.

Answer the following statement true (T) or false (F)

Legal Studies & Paralegal