Why Aren't You Using Requests For Admissions?
By Katherine Gallo and Christopher E. Cobey
The Docket – San Mateo County Bar Association, January/February 1999

If you are like most lawyers, you are using the typical discovery devices to gather up all your information--form interrogatories, special interrogatories, requests for production of documents, and of course the deposition schedule from hell. However, requests for admissions are rarely in a party's discovery plan. We suggest you take a look a closer look at C.C.P. '2033. Requests for admissions are wonderful, tricky little discovery devices that really help you set up your case. Let us explain why.

First Reason: Setting Issues to Rest

The main purpose of requests for admissions is to set issues to rest by compelling admissions of things that cannot reasonably be controverted. Weil and Brown, Cal. Prac. Guide: Civil Procedure Before Trial (TRG 1998), '8:1256, citing Brigante v. Huang (1993) 20 Cal. App. 4th 1569, 1577. If a party admits key facts, including legal conclusions, you may be in a position to move for a motion for summary judgment or summary adjudication. Since requests for admissions are conclusive (unless the court permits an admission to be withdrawn or interprets it so as to limit its effect), the response can't be explained away in a declaration as can be done with answers to interrogatories or deposition questions.

• Read full article (pdf)

• "The 1986 Discovery Act—Is it Working?"
  
• "There's This Case That Says . . . Depositions"
  
• "The Codes—They are a Changin' "
  
• "Oops!!! Now what do I do?"
  
• "I Have This Great Doctor You Gotta See"
  
• "Do You Have All Your Ducks (Experts) in a Row?"
  
• "Why Aren't You Using Requests for Admissions?"
  
• "Let the Other Guy Do the Work… Which Parts of Litigation-Related Investigation Are Not Protected from Disclosure?"
  
• "Five of the Most Annoying Discovery Objections by Opposing Counsel and the Rulings That Are Sure to Follow"