Walker

Walker v. Lakewood Condominium Owners Ass'n

Good Law
1999 WL 391918·186 F.R.D. 584·44 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 1027·1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16333
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaMay 26, 1999No. CV 93-4531 DT (ANX)California2,686 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Nakazato, J.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

I. INTRODUCTION

Before the Court is a motion to compel answers to special interrogatories (“Motion”) that raises what appear to be the following novel questions:

(1) Whether interrogatories that were served, but objected to and not answered, count against the 25 interrogatory limit imposed by Rule 1 33(a) and Local Rule 8.2.1?

(2) Whether a propounding party can circumvent the numerical limit by unilaterally “withdrawing” interrogatories after the responding party has prepared and served a written response?

For the reasons discussed below, the answer to the first question is “yes” and the answer to the second question is “no.” Therefore, the Motion is denied.

II. BACKGROUND

After having served 35 interrogatories on third-party plaintiff City of Lakewood (“Lakewood”), which Lakewood objected to as being untimely served relative to the operative discovery cut-off date, third-party defendant Fair Housing Foundation of Long Beach (“FHF”) served 29 more interrogatories 2 on Lakewood. FHF served these additional interrogatories nearly a year later without prior leave of the Court. Accordingly, Lakewood objected to these interrogatories as unauthorized,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.