Motion to Compel Depositions in North Dakota

Background

“A party generally may obtain discovery regarding any nonprivileged matter relevant to the party's claim or defense.” (See St. Alexius Med. Ctr. v. Nesvig (2022) 971 N.W.2d 878, 881.)

“Rule 26(b)(1), N.D.R.Civ.P., provides: for good cause, the court may order the discovery of any matter relevant to the subject matter involved in the action.” (See Johnson v. Mark (2013) 834 N.W.2d 291, 295.)

“Relevant information need not be admissible at the trial if the discovery appears reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence.” (See id.)

General Information for Complaints and Motions

“Discovery is limited under Rule 26(b)(1), NDRCivP, to any matter, not privileged, which is relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action.” (See Fichter v. Kadrmas (1993) 507 N.W.2d 72, 74.)

“Under N.D.R.Civ.P. 30(c), the officer taking a deposition shall put a witness on oath.”  (See AALUND v. North Dakota Workers Comp. BU (2001) 622 N.W.2d 210, 214.)

“Rule 32(a)(3)(B), N.D.R.Civ.P., authorizes the use of depositions at trials and hearings so far as admissible under the rules of evidence, and depositions may be used against any party who was present at the taking of the deposition if the witness is more than 100 miles from the place of trial or hearing.” (See id.)

Standard of Review and Burdens of Proof

“A trial court has broad discretion regarding the scope of discovery, and its discovery decisions will not be reversed on appeal absent an abuse of discretion.” (See Matter of Estate of Schmidt (1997) 572 N.W.2d 430, 433.)

“A district court abuses its discretion when it acts in an arbitrary, unreasonable, or unconscionable manner.” (See Heinle v. Heinle (2010) 777 N.W.2d 590, 602.)

The Court’s Decisions

It is well settled that “parties may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, which is relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action, whether it relates to the claim or defense of the party seeking discovery or to the claim or defense of any other party, including the existence, description, nature, custody, condition, and location of any books, documents, or other tangible things and the identity and location of persons having knowledge of any discoverable matter.” (See Gerhardt v. D.L.K (1982) 327 N.W.2d 113, 114 n.3.)

It is also well settled that “the deposition of a party may be used by an adverse party for any purpose.” (See Klein v. Harper (1971) 186 N.W.2d 426, 433.)