Motion to Compel Further Responses to Interrogatories in Oklahoma

What Is a Motion to Compel Further Responses to Interrogatories?

Background

“Section 549 is authority for written interrogatories which simply means the asking of questions. The scope of the questions may relate to any matter which may be inquired into by deposition.” (See Warren v. Myers (1976) 554 P.2d 1171, 1173.)

“Any party to a civil action or proceeding may serve written interrogatories upon any adverse party, to be answered by the party served, or, if the party served is a public or private corporation or a partnership or association, upon any officer or agent, who shall furnish such information as is available to the party.” (See Independent Sch. Dist. No. 40 v. Sarkeys, Inc. (1977) 569 P.2d 1000, 1003 n.3.)

“Interrogatories may relate to any matters which can be inquired into by deposition, and the answers may be used to the same extent as answers in depositions.” (See id.)

General Information for Complaints and Motions

“Interrogatories may be served after commencement of the action and without leave of court, except that a plaintiff may not serve interrogatories until after the service of summons without leave of court granted with or without notice.” (See id.)

“Answers to interrogatories to which objection is made shall be deferred until the objections are determined.” (See id.)

“Interrogatories may be served after a deposition has been taken and a deposition may be sought after interrogatories have been answered, but the court, on motion of the deponent or the party interrogated, may make such protective order as justice may require.” (See id.)

“The number of interrogatories or of sets of interrogatories to be served is not limited except as justice requires to protect the party from annoyance, expense, embarrassment, or oppression.” (See id.)

Standard of Review and Burdens of Proof

“[A] trial court is accorded broad discretion in deciding discovery matters, and its determination in such matters will not be disturbed absent a finding of abuse of discretion or that the decision is contrary to law." (See Robinson v. Southerland (2005) 123 P.3d 35, 40.)

“To reverse a trial court on the ground of abuse of discretion it must be found that the trial judge made a clearly erroneous conclusion and judgment, against reason and evidence.” (See La. Mun. Police Employees' Ret. Sys. v. McClendon (2013) 307 P.3d 393, 398.)

“Absent statutory or precedential direction otherwise, we hence review the trial court's orders denying discovery and approving settlement for any abuse of discretion.” (See id.)

The Court’s Decisions

It is well settled that “parties may obtain discovery of any matter not privileged, which is relevant to the subject matter involved in a pending action, whether it relates to a claim or defense of the party seeking discovery.” (See Scott v. Peterson (2005) 126 P.3d 1232, 1234.)

It is also well settled that “written interrogatories, are governed by the language of this Court in State ex rel. Westerheide v. Shilling, 190 Okla. 305, 123 P.2d 674 (1942), where it was held the matter must be relevant to the issues to be tried and yet not privileged.”(See Warren v. Myers (1976) 554 P.2d 1171, 1173.)

Documents for Motion to Compel Further Responses to Interrogatories in Oklahoma

Sort By

PROFESSIONAL FINANCE COMPANY INC v. JASON D HEATH document preview

PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND IN THE ALTERNATIVE PLAINTIFF'S…

13 pages

7 . e e I i ih WANE ILED » MARIE HIRST COURT CLERK NARIAN COUNTY, OKLAHOMA * mo 5668 SFT …