Books


Texas Discovery: A Guide to Taking and Resisting Discovery Under the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure

Standing Order with Automatic Update Service

Robert K. Wise, Kennon Wooten


Add To Cart

Discovery is the largest cost in most civil actions—as much as ninety percent in complex cases! It also can be the most frustrating part of trial. The key is properly drafting, and responding to, written discovery.

NEW THIS YEAR: Texas Written Discovery has been expanded to include all types of Discovery and includes a new Co-Author, Kennon Wooten.  There are new chapters covering Depositions, Expert Testimony and Physical and Mental Examinations.  There is also a new, robust section on Electronic Discovery. Robert Wise is a founding member of Lillard Wise Szygenda PLLC and his practice centers on trial and appellate litigation.

Robert Wise is a founding member of Lillard Wise Szygenda PLLC and his practice centers on trial and appellate litigation. Mr. Wise  is an accomplished writer, having taught legal writing at the Dedman School of Law of Southern Methodist University. Kennon Wooten is a partner at Scott Douglass & McConnico LLP in Austin, Texas and served as the Rules Attorney for the Supreme Court of Texas.



Satisfaction Guarantee: You will always have a full 30 days from receipt in which to review any book. If you don’t want the book, simply return it in resalable condition within 30 days of receipt and write “cancel” on the invoice. If you paid by credit or debit card you will receive a full refund of the purchase price (excluding return shipping & handling). eBook returns are only available if the eBook has not yet been downloaded and updates made available during any subscription term are not refundable.
For more information about online access and our downloadable EPUB format see our FAQ.

  • Availability: Available
  • Brand: Texas Lawyer
  • Product Type: Books
  • Edition: 2019
  • Page Count: 984
  • ISBN: 978-1-62881-502-3
  • Pub#/SKU#: TXDIS19
  • Pub Date: 08/28/2018

Author Image
  • Robert K. Wise
ROBERT K. WISE
Mr. Wise is a founding member of Lillard Wise Szygenda PLLC. Since completing his clerkship for the Hon. Paul C. Weick of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, he has practiced law in Dallas, Texas, for more than thirty years. A former equity partner in the international law firm of Hunton & Williams LLP, Mr. Wise left Hunton to form Lillard Wise Szygenda, a boutique litigation firm focused on providing elite representation at economical rates. Mr. Wise’s practice centers on trial and appellate litigation. He has tried more than thirty lawsuits and arbitrations and has argued more than thirty appeals in both Texas and federal appellate courts. His practice areas include: complex commercial litigation involving contract, misrepresentation, and breach of fiduciary duty claims, primarily in the energy, construction, banking, and real estate industries; construction-defects litigation; accounting-malpractice defense; and complex insurance-coverage claims.

Mr. Wise also is an accomplished writer, having taught legal writing at the Dedman School of Law of
Southern Methodist University for five years and having published a number of law review articles on a variety of topics. Some of Mr. Wise’s trial and appellate accomplishments include:

Obtained zero liability judgment after seven-day bench trial in deceptive-advertising action brought by the FTC against three debt-settlement companies and their officers and directors in which the FTC sought more than $58 million dollars in damages. See FTC v. Financial Freedom Processing, Inc., et al., No. 3:10-CV-2446-N (N.D. Tex. Mar. 12, 2012).
Obtained $2.5 million summary judgment award on railway’s indemnity claim against feed mill operator related to railroad crossing accident. See Kan. City So. Ry. v. Pilgrim’s Pride Corp., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30260 (W.D. La. Mar. 29, 2010).
Clarified the law on the proper calculation of administrative penalties under Section 15.023 of the Public Utility Regulatory Act. See PUC Docket No. 37634, Agreed Notice of Violation and Settlement Agreement Relating to Luminant Energy Company LLC’s Violation Of PURA § 39.151(j) and PUC Subst. R. 25.503(f)(2), Relating to Failure to Adhere to ERCOT Protocol 6.10.5.4(1) Concerning Load Acting as Resource Service Requirements, Order on Certified Issue at 3 (Feb. 25, 2010)
Successfully defended a major electric generating company in an administrative proceeding seeking the largest fine ($171 million) ever imposed by the Public Utility Commission of Texas
Obtained favorable jury verdict in million dollar breach of contract and fraud action brought against a major midstream natural gas company
Successfully prosecuted a multi-million dollar claim for defective design and construction of one the world’s state of- the art, largest, and most expensive aggregate processing plants
Successfully defended a leading pre-stressed concrete pipe manufacturer against a multi-million dollar claim that the pipe supplied for a major water transmission pipeline was defective
Successfully represented several other pipe manufacturers in many multi-million dollar cases alleging design and manufacturing defects in pre-stressed concrete water pipe
Tried two multi-million dollar arbitrations seeking reimbursement under Directors’ & Officers’ liability insurance policies
Clarified Texas law on standing to sue accounting firms for negligent misrepresentation. See Compass Bank v. King, Griffin & Adamson, P.C., No. 3:01-CIV-2028-N, 2003 WL 22077721 (N.D. Tex. Sept. 5, 2003), aff’d, 388 F.3d 504 (5th Cir. 2004); Abrams Ctr. Nat’l Bank v. Farmer Fuqua & Huff, P.C., 225 S.W.3d 171 (Tex. App.–El Paso 2005)
Represented a large natural gas company in many contract disputes resulting in recoveries and/or contract savings valued at more than one billion dollars
Successfully tried and handled many complex commercial disputes for a variety of corporate clients, including obtaining a favorable jury verdict against Enron after a six-week jury trial
Successfully handled ERISA class action for major electric utility
Obtained a $2,000,000 million jury verdict in a wrongful discharge and defamation action
Successfully handled derivate litigation for major electric utility
Successfully prosecuted antitrust and fraud claims involving coal leases worth billions of dollars for a major electric utility
Argued appeals in the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the Third, Fifth Ninth, and D.C. Circuits and most Texas courts of appeals. Published opinions in appeals handled by Mr. Wise include: CQ Inc. v. TXU Mining Co., 565 F.3d 268 (5th Cir. 2009); Metromedia Energy, Inc. v. Enserch Energy Servs., Inc., 409 F.3d 574 (3d Cir. 2005); Friberg v. Kan. City So. Ry., 267 F.3d 439 (5th Cir. 2001); Abrams Ctr. Nat’l Bank v. Farmer Fuqua & Huff, P.C., 225 S.W.3d 171 (Tex. App.–El Paso 2005, no pet.); Larue v. Genescreen, Inc., 957 S.W.2d 958 (Tex. App.– Beaumont 1997). Professional and Civic Affiliations
Member, State Bar of Texas
Member, Dallas Bar Association, Chairman and Vice Chairman, Legal-Ethics Committee
Member, American Bar Association Publications and Speeches
Author, Administrative Penalties against Electricity Market Participants under the Texas Public Utility Regulatory Act, 62 Baylor L. Rev. 788 (2010)
Co-Author, First Refusal Rights under Texas Law, 62 Baylor L. Rev. 433 (2010)
Co-Author, Of Lies and Disclaimers―Contracting Around Fraud under Texas Law, 41 St. Mary’s L.J. 119 (2009)
Principal Author, Negligent Misrepresentation in Texas: The Misunderstood Tort, 40 Tex. Tech L. Rev. 845 (2008)
Author, Mediation in Texas: Can the Judge Really Make Me Do That?, 47 S. Tex. Law Rev. 849 (2006)
Author, Demand Futility in Shareholder-Derivative Litigation under Texas Law, 28 Tex. Tech L. Rev. 59 (1997)
Author, The Lawyer-Witness Rule: A Comparison of a Lawyer's Ability to be Both Witness and an Advocate under the Texas Code of Professional Responsibility and the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct, 31 S. Tex. L. Rev. 651 (1990)
Author, Note, Binding Interest Arbitration in the Public Sector: Is it Constitutional?, 18 Wm. & Mary L. Rev. 787 (1977)
Speaker, Dallas Bar Association clinics on various subjects Education, Honors, and Miscellaneous
J.D., William & Mary School of Law, Editor, William & Mary Law Review, 1977
B.A., Marietta College, magna cum laude, 1974
Clerk, Hon. Paul C. Weick, Judge of U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Legal Writing Instructor at Dedman School of Law of Southern Methodist University
Named a “Texas Super Lawyer” in 2011 and 2012.
Named “Litigator of the Week” in March 25, 2012 edition of the Texas Lawyer for beating the FTC in FTC v. Financial Freedom Processing, Inc., et al.
Member, College of the State Bar of Texas (2009-2010)
Member, Pro Bono College of the State Bar of Texas (2009-2010)



Author Image
  • Kennon Wooten

Ms. Wooten

Ms.Wooten is a partner at Scott Douglass & McConnico LLP in Austin,Texas.  Before joining the firm, she clerked for former Chief Justice Wallace B. Jefferson of the Supreme Court of Texas, worked at Baker Botts LLP (in the trial, pharmaceutical, and appellate practice groups), and served as the Rules Attorney for the Supreme Court of Texas.  In her current practice, she represents a wide range of clients on both sides of the docket.  Her practice areas include complex commercial litigation, personal injury, products liability, professional malpractice, and general civil litigation and appeals.            

Ms.Wooten’s experience as Rules Attorney gave her a specialized understanding of local and statewide procedural rules in Texas. In that position, she responded to public inquiries regarding rules,assisted the Supreme Court of Texas with promulgating and amending rules, and worked with multiple committees and task forces to analyze and address issues confronting Texas litigants.  She continues to focus on rule-related matters in private practice.  She serves as the Vice-Chair of the State Bar of Texas Court Rules Committee and is a frequent writer and speaker on rule-related topics for CLEs.  She served on the Supreme Court of Texas Task Force for Rules in Expedited Actions in2011-2012 and now serves on the Texas Commission to Expand Civil Legal Services. 

Ms.Wooten is actively involved in the bar. She served as the President of the Austin Young Lawyers Association in 2012-2013.  In addition to serving on the State Bar Court Rules Committee, she serves on the Austin Bar Association Board of Directors, Editorial Board for The Advocate (a quarterly publication of the State Bar’s litigation section), and Board of Directors for the Texas Legal Services Center.  She also serves as Editor-in-Chief for Austin Lawyer.  In 2011, she received a Special Commendation of the Supreme Court of Texas and State Bar of Texas for her work as the Rules Attorney.  She has been named as a Texas Rising Star in 2008, 2009, and 2013-2016.


Chapter 1: Introduction

Chapter 2: Discovery’s Purpose and Discovery Control Plans and Limitations—Texas Rule 190
2-1 TEXT OF RULE 190
2-1:1 Rule 190 Discovery Limitations
2-1:1.1 190.1. Discovery Control Plan Required.
2-1:1.2 190.2. Discovery Control Plan—Expedited Actions and Divorces Involving $50,000 or Less (Level 1).
2-1:1.3 190.3. Discovery Control Plan—By Rule (Level 2).
2-1:1.4 190.4. Discovery Control Plan—By Order (Level 3).
2-1:1.5 190.5. Modification of Discovery Control Plan.
2-1:1.6 190.6. Certain Types of Discovery Excepted.
2-1:2 Notes and Comments
2-1:2.1 Exceptions & Applicability
2-1:2.2 Comment to 1999 change
2-2 DISCOVERY’S PURPOSE
2-3 DISCOVERY-CONTROL PLANS
2-3:1 Level 1 Discovery-Control Plans
2-3:2 Level 2 Discovery-Control Plans
2-3:3 Level 3 Discovery-Control Plans
2-3:4 Choosing and Moving the Discovery Level and Modifying the Discovery-Control Plan

Chapter 3: Modifying Discovery Procedures; Conference Requirements; Signing Written-Discovery Requests; Responses and Objections; and Filing Requirements—Texas Rule 191
3-1 TEXT OF RULE 191
    3-1:1   Rule 191. Modifying Discovery Procedures and Limitations; Conference Requirement; Signing Disclosures, Discovery Requests, Responses, and Objections; Filing Requirements

3-1:1.1 191.1. Modification of Procedures.
3-1:1.2 191.2. Conference
3-1:1.3 191.3. Signing of Disclosures, Discovery Requests, Notices, Responses, and Objections.
3-1:1.4 191.4. Filing of Discovery Materials.
3-1:1.5 191.5. Service of Discovery Materials.
3-1:2 Notes and Comments
3-1:2.1 Exceptions & Applicability
3-1:2.2 Comments to 1999 change
3-2 MODIFICATION: IN GENERAL
3-2:1 Modification by Parties
3-2:2 Modification by Court
3-3 CONFERENCE AND COOPERATION REQUIREMENTS
3-3:1 Consequences of Failing to Include Certificate of Conference
3-3:2 Assessing Effort to Resolve Discovery Disputes
3-3:3 Consequences of Failing to Make a Reasonable Effort to Resolve Discovery Disputes
3-4 SIGNING AND CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS
3-5 FILING DISCOVERY MATERIALS
3-6 SERVICE OF DISCOVERY MATERIALS

Chapter 4: Permissible Discovery; Forms, Sequence and Scope of Discovery; and Protective Orders—Texas Rule 1924-text of rule 192
4-1 TEXT OF RULE 192
4-1:1 Rule 192. Permissible Discovery: Forms and Scope; Work Product: Protective Orders; Definitions
4-1:1.1 192.1. Forms of Discovery.
4-1:1.2 192.2. Sequence of Discovery.
4-1:1.3 192.3. Scope of Discovery.
4-1:1.4 192.4. Limitations on Scope of Discovery.
4-1:1.5 192.5. Work Product.
4-1:1.6 192.6. Protective Orders.
4-1:1.7 192.7. Definitions.
4-1:2 Notes and Comments
4-1:2.1 Comments to 1999 change:
4-2 DISCOVERY TYPES AND SEQUENCE
4-3 DISCOVERY’S SCOPE
4-3:1    Introduction
4-3:2    Trial Witnesses
4-3:3    Income Tax Returns
4-3:4    Financial Information and Bank Records
4-3:5    Impeachment Information
4-3:6    Discoverable Information Need Not Be Admissible at Trial
4-4 WORK PRODUCT
4-4:1 History of Work-Product Doctrine
4-4:2 Definition and Protection of “Work Product” under Work-Product Privilege
4-4:2.1    Comparing Work-Product Privilege with Attorney-Client Privilege
4-4:2.2    Anticipation of Litigation Needed to Trigger Work-Product Privilege
4-4:2.3    Scope of Protection for “Core” and “Other” Work Product
4-4:3 Exceptions to Work-Product Privilege
4-5 PROTECTIVE ORDERS

Chapter 5: Written Discovery: Response, Objection, Privilege Assertion; Amending or Supplementing Responses; Failure to Timely Respond; Presumption of Authenticity—Texas Rule 193
5-1 TEXT OF RULE 193
5-1:1 Rule 193. Written Discovery: Response; Objection; Assertion of Privilege; Supplementation and Amendment; Failure to timely Respond; Presumption of Authenticity.
5-1:1.1 193.1. Responding to Written Discovery; Duty to Make Complete Response.
5-1:1.2 193.2. Objecting to Written Discovery.
5-1:1.3 193.3. Asserting a Privilege.
5-1:1.4 193.4. Hearing and Ruling on Objections and Assertions of Privilege.
5-1:1.5 193.5. Amending or Supplementing Responses to Written Discovery.
5-1:1.6 193.6. Failing to Timely Respond—Effect on Trial.
5-1:1.7 193.7. Production of Documents Self-Authenticating.
5-1:2 Exceptions & Applicability
5-1:2.1 Comment to 1999 change
5-2 RESPONSES TO WRITTEN-DISCOVERY ¬REQUESTS
5-2:1 Reasonable Inquiry with Respect to Disclosures, Interrogatories, and Requests for Admission
5-2:2 Reasonable Inquiry With Respect to Production Requests
5-3 OBJECTIONS TO WRITTEN-DISCOVERY REQUESTS IN GENERAL
5-3:1 Proper and Improper Objections to Written-Discovery Requests
5-3:2 “General” and “Subject-to” Objections are Improper
5-4 PRIVILEGE OBJECTIONS AND ASSERTIONS
5-4:1 Introduction
5-4:2 Exemption for Litigation Material
5-4:3 Inadvertent Production
5-5 HEARINGS AND RULINGS ON PRIVILEGE OBJECTIONS AND ASSERTIONS
5-6 AMENDMENT AND SUPPLEMENTATION
5-7 CONSEQUENCES OF FAILING TO TIMELY ¬RESPOND, AMEND, OR SUPPLEMENT
5-8 PRESUMPTION OF AUTHENTICITY

Chapter 6: Requests for Disclosure–Texas Rule 194
6-1 TEXT OF RULE 194
6-1:1 Rule 194. Requests for Disclosure
6-1:1.1 194.1. Request
6-1:1.2 194.2. Content
6-1:1.3 194.3. Response
6-1:1.4 194.4. Production
6-1:1.5 194.5. No Objection or Assertion of Work Product
6-1:1.6 194.6. Certain Responses Not Admissible
6-1:2 Notes and Comments
6-1:2.1 Comments to 1999 change:
6-2 REQUESTS FOR DISCLOSURE IN GENERAL
6-3 PROCEDURE
6-3:1 Form of Disclosure Requests
6-3:2 Time for Serving Disclosure Requests
6-3:3 Contents of a Disclosure Request
6-3:3.1 The Parties’ Correct Names
6-3:3.2 Potential Parties
6-3:3.3    Legal Theories and Factual Bases for Claims and Defenses
6-3:3.4    Damages
6-3:3.5    Persons Having Knowledge of Relevant Facts
6-3:3.5a Identifying Persons Having Knowledge of Relevant Facts
6-3:3.5b The Person’s Connection to the Case
6-3:3.6     Testifying Experts
6-3:3.7     Insuring and Indemnity Agreements
6-3:3.8     Settlement Agreements
6-3:3.9    Witness Statements
6-3:3.10 Medical Records and Bills
6-3:3.11 Responsible Third Parties
6-3:3.12 Materials That May Be Used to Support the Disclosing Party’s Claims or Defenses in a Level 1 Action
6-3:4    Responding to Disclosure Requests
6-3:4.1 Privilege Objections and Assertions
6-3:4.2    Amending and Supplementing Disclosures
6-3:4.3    Failing to Respond, Partial Responses and Late Responses
6-3:4.4    Use of Disclosures


Chapter 7: Expert Discovery—Texas Rule 195
7-1 RULE 195. DISCOVERY REGARDING TESTIFYING EXPERT WITNESSES
7-1:1 Text of Texas Rule 195
7-1:1.1 195.1. Permissible Discovery Tools. 
7-1:1.2 195.2.  Schedule for Designating Experts.
7-1:1.3 195.3.  Scheduling Depositions.
7-1:1.4 195.4.  Oral Deposition. 
7-1:1.5 195.5.  Court-Ordered Reports. 
7-1:1.6 195.6.  Amendment and Supplementation. 
7-1:1.7 195.7.  Cost of Expert Witnesses. 
7-1:2  Notes and Comments
7-1:2.1 Comment to 1999 change:
7-2    EXPERT DISCOVERY IN GENERAL
7-3    TYPES OF EXPERTS
7-4    DISCOVERY CONCERNING TESTIFYING EXPERTS
7-4:1    Expert-Disclosure Requests and Designating Experts
7-4:2    Depositions of Testifying Experts
7-4:3    Expert Reports of Testifying Experts
7-4:4    Inadvertent Disclosure of Privilege Materials to Testifying Experts
7-4:5    Discovery of an Expert’s Bias
7-4:6    Amending and Supplementing Testifying Expert Discovery
7-5    DISCOVERY CONCERNING CONSULTING EXPERTS
     

Chapter 8: Production Requests–Texas Rule 196
8-1 TEXT OF RULE 196
8-1:1 Rule 196 Requests for Production and Inspection to Parties; Requests and Motions for Entry Upon Property
8-1:1.1 196.1 Request for Production and Inspection to Parties.
8-1:1.2 196.2 Response to Request for Production and Inspection.
8-1:1.3 196.3 Production.
8-1:1.4 196.4 Electronic or Magnetic Data.
8-1:1.5 196.5 Destruction or Alteration.
8-1:1.7 196.7 Request or Motion for Entry upon Property.
8-1:2 Notes and Comments
8-1:2.1 Comments to 1999 change:
8-2    PRODUCTION REQUESTS IN GENERAL
8-3    NUMBER OF PRODUCTION REQUESTS
8-4    RESPONDING TO PRODUCTION ¬REQUESTS
8-4:1    Introduction
8-4:2     Motion for Protective Order
8-4:3    Production or Inspection
8-4:3.1    Possession, Custody or Control
8-4:3.2    Usual Course of Business or Organized and Labeled to Correspond with the Categories in the Request
8-4:3.2a Documents are “Kept in the Usual Course of Business” When the Litigant Functions in the Manner of a Commercial Enterprise or they Result From “Regularly Conducted Activity”
8-4:3.2b The Responding Party Generally Decides the Manner of Production
8-5 OBJECTIONS
8-5:1 “General” and “Subject to” Objections
8-5:2 Privilege
8-5:3 Scope Objections: Relevance and not Reasonably Calculated to Lead to the Discovery of Admissible Evidence
8-5:4 Overbreadth
8-5:5 Undue Burden or Unnecessary Expense
8-5:6 Vagueness, Ambiguity or Lack of Specificity
8-5:7 Unreasonably Cumulative or Duplicative
8-5:8 Expert Opinion
8-5:9 Marshalling Evidence
8-5:10 Supernumerary Objections
8-5:11    The Requested Information or Material is in the Requesting Party’s or a Nonparty’s Possession
8-5:12    Fishing Expedition
8-5:13 The Responding Party’s Failure to Provide Discovery
8-5:14 Harassment
8-5:15 Invasion of Protected Rights
8-5:16 A Claim’s or Defense’s Invalidity
8-5:17 Confidentiality
8-6 ELECTRONIC DISCOVERY
8-6:1 Electronic Discovery Procedure
8-6:2 Parties’ Responsibility to Confer
8-6:3 Requests for Electronic Discovery
8-6:4 Reasonably Available in the Ordinary Course of Business
8-6:5 Objections and Hearing on Requests for Production of Electronic Information
8-6:6    Direct Access to Electronic-Storage Devices
8-6:7    Availability of Mandamus
8-7    REQUEST OR MOTION FOR ENTRY ON PROPERTY
8-7:1    The Request and Motion or Notice
8-7:2    The Scope of a Request for Entry on a Party’s Property
8-7:3    The Scope of an Order for Entry on a Nonparty’s Property
8-7:4    Response to a Request or Motion and Notice

Chapter 9: Interrogatories–Texas Rule 197
9-1 TEXT OF RULE 197
9-1:1 Rule 197. Interrogatories to Parties
9-1:1.1 197.1. Interrogatories.
9-1:1.2 197.2 Response to Interrogatories.
9-1:1.3 197.3 Use.
9-1:2 Notes and Comments
9-1:2.1 Comments to 1999 change:
9-2    INTERROGATORIES IN GENERAL
9-3    INTERROGATORY TYPES
9-4     NUMBER OF INTERROGATORIES
9-5    INTERROGATORY RESPONSES
9-5:1 Introduction
9-5:2 Option to Produce Business Records
9-5:3 Objections
9-5:3.1     “General” and “Subject-to” Objections
9-5:3.2     Privilege
9-5:3.3 Scope Objections: Relevance and Not Reasonably Calculated to Lead to the Discovery of Admissible Evidence
9-5:3.4     Overbreadth
9-5:3.5     Undue Burden or Unnecessary Expense
9-5:3.6     Vagueness, Ambiguity, or Lack of Specificity
9-5:3.7     Unreasonably Cumulative or Duplicative
9-5:3.8     Expert Opinion
9-5:3.9     Marshalling Evidence
9-5:3.10 Supernumerary Objections
9-5:3.11 The Requested Information or Material is in the Requesting Party’s or a  Nonparty’s Possession
9-5:3.12 Fishing Expedition
9-5:3.13 The Responding Party’s Failure to Provide Discovery
9-5:3.14 Harassment
9-5:3.15 Invasion of Protected Rights
9-5:3.16 A Claim’s or Defense’s Invalidity
9-5:3.17 Confidentiality
9-5:3.18 Compound or Calls for a Legal Conclusion
9-6     SIGNATURE AND VERIFICATION

Chapter 10: Requests for Admission–Texas Rule 198
10-1    TEXT OF RULE 198
10-1:1  Rule 198 Requests for Admissions
10-1:1.1  Requests for Admissions
10-1:1.2 198.2. Response to Requests for Admissions.
10-1:1.3 198.3. Effect of Admissions; Withdrawal or Amendment.
10-2    REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION IN GENERAL
10-2:1    Form of Requests for Admissions
10-2:2    Scope of Requests for Admission
10-2:2.1 Statements of Fact or Opinion or the Application of Law to Fact
10-2:2.2 Mirror-Image (or Converse) Requests for Admission
10-2:2.3 Genuineness of Documents
10-3    TYPES OF ADMISSIONS
10-4    NUMBER OF REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION
10-5    RESPONSES TO REQUESTS FOR ¬ADMISSION
10-5:1    Admissions
10-5:2    Denials
10-5:3    Admitting or Denying in Part
10-5:4    Lack of Information
10-5:5    Motion for Protective Order   
10-5:6    Move for (or Request) an Extension of Time to Respond
10-5:7    Privilege Assertions and Objections
10-5:8    Objections
10-5:8.1“General” and “Subject-to” Objections
10-5:8.2 Scope Objections: Relevance and Not Reasonably Calculated to Lead to the Discovery of Admissible Evidence
10-5:8.3 Overbreadth
10-5:8.4 Undue Burden or Expense
10-5:8.5 Vagueness and Ambiguity
10-5:8.6 Unreasonably Cumulative or Duplicative
10-5:8.7 Expert Opinion
10-5:8.8 Mirror-image or Converse Requests
10-5:8.9 Compound
10-5:8.10 Genuine Issue for Trial or the Requesting Party has the Burden of Proof
10-5:8.11 The Matter is Within the Requesting Party’s Knowledge, is Equally Available to the Parties, or is Unknown to the Responding Party
10-5:8.12 Supernumerary Objections
10-5:8.13 The “Document Speaks for Itself”
10-5:8.14 The Responding Party’s Failure to Provide Discovery
10-5:8.15 Harassment
10-5:8.16 Invasion of Protected Rights
10-5:8.17 A Claim’s or Defense’s Invalidity
10-5:8.18 Confidentiality
10-5:8.19 Calls for a Legal Conclusion or the Application of Law to Fact
10-5:8.20 Hearsay
10-5:8.21 Improper Incorporation of, or Reference to, Documents
10-5:8.22 Do Nothing
10-6    USE AND EFFECT OF ADMISSIONS
10-6:1    Persons Bound by Admissions
10-6:2    Who Can Use Admissions
10-6:3    Limitations on Use of Requests for Admission Against the State of Texas
10-6:4    Effect of Admissions and Denials
10-6:5    Use of Admissions or Denials in Other Proceedings
10-7    WITHDRAWAL, SUPPLEMENTATION OR AMENDMENT OF RESPONSES  TO REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION
10-7:1    Good Cause
10-7:2    Undue Prejudice
10-7:3    Merits Would be “Subserved”
10-7:4    Withdrawal of Merits-Preclusive Deemed Admissions
10-7:5    Use of Withdrawn or Amended Admissions
10-8    TESTING THE SUFFICIENCY OF ANSWERS, OBJECTIONS, AND PRIVILEGE ASSERTIONS TO REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION
10-9    EXPENSES FOR FAILURE TO ADMIT: THE “ADMIT-OR-PAY” RULE

CHAPTER 11: DEPOSITIONS—TEXAS RULES 199-203

11-1 DEPOSITIONS IN GENERAL
11-1:1    Who Can Be Deposed
11-1:1.1 Introduction
11-1:1.2 Attorneys
11-1:1.3 Lack of Knowledge
11-1:1.4 Apex Depositions
11-1:1.5 Depositions of Organizations (i.e., Representative Depositions)
11-1:1.5a The Representative Deposition Notice
11-1:1.5b The Organization Is Not Required to Produce a Specific Individual as Its Representative or an Individual with the Most Knowledge About the Notice’s Subject Matters or Even One With Personal Knowledge about Them
11-1:1.5c Reasonable Particularity
11-1:1.5.1d The Noticing Party Generally Can Question an Organization’s Representative about Matters for Which the Representative was not Designated and about Matters Outside the Deposition Notice’s Scope
11-1:1.5e Objecting to a Representative Deposition Notice
11-1:1.6 The Organization’s Obligations
11-1:1.6a Because the Representative’s Testimony is not a Judicial Admission, It can be Corrected, Contradicted, Amended or Supplemented
11-1:1.6b Duplicative Depositions—Deposing an Organization’s Representative Individually after the Organization’s Deposition or Vice Versa and Taking More than One Representative Deposition
11-1:1.6c Remedies for an Organization’s Failure to Designate a Witness or to Properly Prepare its Representative
11-1:2    Depositions’ Scope
11-1:3    Expert Depositions
11-2 ORAL DEPOSITIONS—TEXAS RULE 199
11-2:1    Text of Rule 199
11-2:1.1  Rule 199 Depositions upon Oral Examination
11-2:1.2 199.1.  Oral Examination; Alternative Methods of Conducting or Recording.
11-2:1.3 199.2.  Procedure for Noticing Oral Deposition.
11-2:1.4 199.3.  Compelling Witness to Attend. 
11-2:1.5 199.4.  Objections to Time and Place of Oral Deposition.
11-2:1.6 199.5.  Examination, Objection, and Conduct During Oral Depositions.
11-2:1.7 199.6.  Hearing on objections. 
11-2:2 Notes and Comments
11-2:2.1 Comment to 1999 change
11-2:3    Oral Depositions in General
11-2:4    The Deposition Notice
11-2:4.1 Time for Serving the Deposition Notice
11-2:4.2 The Notice’s Content
11-2:4.2a The Deposition’s Time and Place
11-2:4.2b Alternative Methods of Conducting or Recording the Deposition
11-2:4.2c Additional Attendees
11-2:4.2d Document Requests
11-2:5 Compelling Attendance at the Deposition
11-2:6 Taking, Attending, and Participating in Oral Depositions
11-2:6.1 In Person
11-2:6.2 By Telephone or Other Remote Electronic Means
11-2:6.3 By Written Questions
11-2:7    Recording the Deposition
11-2:8    Objections to the Time, Place, or Other Arrangements for a Deposition
11-2:9    The Deposition’s Conduct
11-2:9.1 Time Limitations
11-2:9.2 Attorneys’ and Witnesses’ Conduct
11-2:9.3 Objections
11-2:9.4 Instructing a Witness Not to Answer and Suspending a Deposition
11-2:9.5 Motions to Compel Answers to Deposition Questions
11-2:10    Supplementing Oral Deposition Testimony
11-2:11    Second Depotions of a Witness already Deposed.
11-3    DEPOSITIONS ON WRITTEN QUESTIONS—TEXAS RULE 200
11-3:1    Text of Rule 200
11-3:1.1 200.1. Procedure for Noticing Deposition upon Written Questions.
11-3:1.2 200.2. Compelling Witness to Attend.
11-3:1.3 200.3. Questions and Objections.
11-3:1.4 200.4. Conducting the Deposition upon Written Questions. 
11-3:2 Notes and Comments
11-3:2.1 Comment to 1999 change
11-3:3 In General
11-3:4 Notice of a Deposition on Written Questions
11-3:5 Compelling the Witness’s Attendance
11-3:6 Questions and Objections
11-3:7    Supplementing Deposition Testimony Upon Written Questions
11-4    DEPOSITIONS IN FOREIGN JURISDICTIONS FOR USE IN TEXAS PROCEEDINGS AND DEPOSITIONS IN TEXAS FOR USE IN FOREIGN PROCEEDINGS—TEXAS RULE 201.
11-4:1    Text of Rule 201
11-4:1.1 Rule 201 Depositions in Foreign Jurisdictions for Use in Texas Proceedings; Depositions in Texas for Use in Foreign Proceedings.
11-4:1.2 201.1.  Depositions in Foreign Jurisdictions for Use in Texas Proceedings.
11-4:1.3 201.2.  Depositions in Texas for Use in Proceedings in Foreign Jurisdictions. 
11-4:2 Notes and Comments
11-4:2.1 Comment to 1999 Change
1-4:3 In General.
11-4:4    Depositions in Another State or Foreign Country for Use in a Texas Court Proceeding.
11-4:4.1 Notice.
11-4:4.2 Letter Rogatory.
11-4:4.3 Letter of Request or Other Such Device.
11-4:4.4 Objections to the Form of the Letter Rogatory, the Letter of Request, or Other Such Device.
11-4:4.5 The Deposition Officer.
11-4:4.6 Method of Taking the Deposition.
11-4:4.7 The Testimony’s Admissibility.
11-4:5    Depositions in Texas for Use in Foreign Proceedings.
11-5    DEPOSITIONS BEFORE SUIT OR TO INVESTIGATE CLAIMS.
11-5:1    Text of Rule 202.
11-5:1.1 202.1.  Generally. 
11-5:1.2 202.2.  Petition. 
11-5:1.3 202.3.  Notice and Service.
11-5:1.4 202.4.  Order.
11-5:1.5 202.5.  Manner of Taking and Use. 
11-5:2 Notes and Comments
11-5:2.1 Exceptions & Applicability:
11-5:2.2 Comment to 1999 change:
11-5:2 In General
11-5:3 The Petition
11-5:3.1 The Petition’s Contents
11-5:3.2 Where the Petition Must be Filed
11-5:3.3 The Petition’s Notice and Service
11-5:4 Hearing and Standards for the Order
11-5:5 The Deposition’s Taking and Use
11-5:6 Appellate Review
11-6    SIGNING, CERTIFICATION AND USE OF ORAL DEPOSITIONS—TEXAS RULE 203.
11-6:1    Text of Rule 203
Rule 203 Signing, Certification and Use of Oral and Written Depositions
11-6:1.2 203.1. Signature and Changes.
11-6:1.3 203.2. Certification. 
11-6:1.4 203.3. Delivery.
11-6:1.5 203.4. Exhibits. .
11-6:1.6 203.5. Motion to Suppress. 
11-6:1.7 203.6. Use.
11-6:2    Presentment, Signature, and Changes
11-6:3    Certification
11-6:4    Delivery
11-6:5     Exhibits
11-6:6  Motions to Suppress
11-6:7 Using Depositions
11-6.7.1 Depositions taken in the same proceeding
11-6:7.2 Depositions Taken in Another Proceeding
11-6:7.3 Procedure for Using Deposition Testimony
11-6:7.4 Use of Nonstenographic Recordings

CHAPTER 12: PHYSICAL AND MENTAL EXAMINATIONS—TEXAS RULE 204

12-1    Text of Rule 204
12-1:1 Rule 204. Physical and Mental Examination
12-1:1.1 204.1 Motion and Order Required.
12-1:1.2 204.2 Report of Examining Physician or Psychologist.
12-1:1.3 204.3 Effect of No Examination.
12-1:1.4 204.4 Cases Arising Under Titles II or V, Family Code.
12-1:1.5 204.5 Definitions.

12-2    MOTION AND ORDER REQUIRED
12-2:1    Motion to Compel Physical or Mental Examination
12-2:1.1 In General
12-2:1.2 Timing and Service of Motion
12-2:1.3 The Motion’s Grounds
12-2:1.3a Good Cause
12-2:1.3b Mental or Physical Condition in Controversy
12-2-:1.3c Respondent’s Use of Psychologist
12-2:2    Order
12-3    REPORT OF EXAMINING PHYSICIAN OR PSYCHOLOGIST
12-3:1    Examined Person’s Right to Report   
12-3:2    Examining Party’s Right to Report
12-3:3    Trial Court’s Discretion to Limit Delivery of Reports
12-3:4    Consequences of Failing or Refusing to Make Reports
12-4    EXAMINATION BY AGREEMENT
12-5    EFFECT OF NO EXAMINATION.
12-6    ACTIONS ARISING UNDER TITLES II OR V, FAMILY CODE (NO MOTION REQUIRED)
12-7    ELIGIBLE EXAMINERS
12-8    EXAMINERS’ DERIVED JUDICIAL IMMUNITY
12-9    CHALLENGING ORDERS UNDER TEXAS RULE 204

Chapter 13 Discovery from Nonparties—Texas Rule 205
13-1 TEXT OF RULE 205
13-1:1 Rule 205. Discovery from Nonparties.
13-1:1.1 205.1. Forms of Discovery; Subpoena Requirement.
13-1:1.2 205.2. Notice.
13-1:1.3 205.3. Production of Documents and Tangible Things Without Deposition.
13-1:2 Notes and Comments
13-1:2.1 Comment to 1999 change
13-2 DISCOVERY FROM NONPARTIES IN GENERAL
13-3 WHO IS A NONPARTY?
13-4 NONPARTY PRODUCTION REQUESTS WITHOUT A DEPOSITION
13-4:1    Service of the Notice and Subpoen
13-4:2 The Notice’s Contents
13-4:3 The Subpoena
13-4:3.1 The Subpoena’s Form
13-4:3.2 Persons Who Can Issue the Subpoena
13-4:3.3 Service of the Subpoena
13-4:4    Response to the Notice and Subpoena
13-4:5    The Subpoena’s Enforcement
13-5    NONPARTY PRODUCTION REQUESTS WITH A DEPOSITION
13-5:1    Service of the Notice and Subpoena
13-5:2    The Notice’s and Subpoena’s Contents
13-5:3    The Subpoena
13-6    REQUESTS FOR MEDICAL OR MENTAL-HEALTH RECORDS REGARDING NONPARTIES
13-7    PROVIDING COPIES TO OTHER PARTIES
13-8    THE NONPARTY’S DOCUMENT ¬PRODUCTION’S COSTS
13-9    NONPARTY DEPOSITIONS

Chapter 14.     Sanctioning Discovery Abuse and Compelling Discovery – Texas Rule 215   
14-1 TEXT OF RULE 215
14-1:1  Rule 215 Abuse of Discovery; Sanctions
14:1.1 215.1. Motion for Sanctions or Order Compelling Discovery.
14:1.2 215.2. Failure to Comply with Order or with Discovery Request.
14:1.3 215.3. Abuse of Discovery Process in Seeking, Making, or Resisting Discovery.
14:1.4 215.4. Failure to Comply with Rule 198.
14:1.5 215.5. Failure of Party or Witness to Attend or to Serve Subpoena; Expenses.
14:1.6 215.6. Exhibits to Motions and Responses.
14:1.2 Notes and Comments
14:1.2.1 Comment to 1999 change
14-2 MOTIONS FOR SANCTIONS OR ORDER COMPELLING DISCOVERY
14-2:1    Notice and Hearing Requirements
14-2:2    Where and What to File
14-2:3  Timeliness of Motions
14-2:4  Motion’s Grounds
14-2:5  Conference and Cooperation Requirements for Motions
14-2:6.  Award of Reasonable Expenses, Including Attorney’s Fees
14-3 DISCOVERY SANCTIONS
14–3:1    General Objectives of and Limits on Discovery Sanctions
14–3:2    Heightened Standards Applicable to Death-Penalty Sanctions
14-3:3  Persons Who May Be Sanctioned—Parties, Attorneys, and Nonparties
14-3:4    Sanctionable Discovery Conduct
14-3:4.1 Conduct that Warrants Motion for Sanctions by Discovering Party
14-3:4.2 Failure to Comply with an Order or with a Discovery Request
14-3:4.3 Abuse of the Discovery Process in Seeking, Making, or Resisting Discovery
14-3:4.4 Failure of a Party or Witness to Attend a Deposition or to Serve a Subpoena on the Witness
14-3:4.5 Spoliation of Evidence
14-3:4.6 Pattern of Discovery Abuse
14-4    PERMISSIBLE DISCOVERY SANCTIONS
14-4:1    Sanctions Orders Specified in Texas Rule 215
14-4:2    A Trial Court’s Inherent Power to Impose Sanctions
14-4:3    Spoliation