Supreme Court of Missouri
en banc
October 15, 2018
Effective July 1, 2019
Effective July 1, 2019
In re:
(1) Repeal of subdivision 56.01(c), entitled "Protective Orders," of Rule 56, entitled "General Provisions Governing Discovery," and in lieu thereof adoption of a new subdivision 56.01(c), entitled "Protective Orders," and a new subdivision 56.01(g), entitled "Cooperation in Discovery."
(2) Repeal of subdivision 58.01(c), entitled "Response," of Rule 58, entitled "Production of Documents and Things and Entry Upon Land for Inspection and Other Purposes," and in lieu thereof adoption of a new subdivision 58.01(c), entitled "Response."
ORDER
56.01 GENERAL PROVISIONS GOVERNING DISCOVERY
* * *
(c) Protective Orders. Upon motion by a party or by the person from whom discovery is sought, including e-discovery, and for good cause shown, the court may make any order which justice requires to protect a party or person from annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, or undue burden or expense, including one or more of the following:
If a motion for protective order is denied in whole or in part, the court may, on such terms and conditions as are just, order that any party or person provide or permit discovery. The provisions of Rule 61.01 apply to the award of expenses incurred in relation to the motion.
In ruling on an objection that the discovery request creates an undue burden or expense, the court shall consider the issues in the case and the serving party's need for such information to prosecute or defend the case and may consider, among other things, the amount in controversy and the parties' relative resources in determining whether the proposed discovery burden or expense outweighs its benefit.
(1) that the discovery not be had;
(2) that the discovery may be had only on specified terms and conditions, including a designation of the time and place;
(3) that the discovery may be had only by a method of discovery other than that selected by the party seeking discovery;
(4) that certain matters not be inquired into, or that the scope of the discovery be limited to certain matters;
(5) that discovery be conducted with no one present except persons designated by the court;
(6) that a deposition after being sealed be opened only by order of the court;
(7) that a trade secret or other confidential research, development, or commercial information not be disclosed or be disclosed only in a designated way;
(8) that the parties simultaneously file specified documents or information enclosed in sealed envelopes to be opened as directed by the court.
(2) that the discovery may be had only on specified terms and conditions, including a designation of the time and place;
(3) that the discovery may be had only by a method of discovery other than that selected by the party seeking discovery;
(4) that certain matters not be inquired into, or that the scope of the discovery be limited to certain matters;
(5) that discovery be conducted with no one present except persons designated by the court;
(6) that a deposition after being sealed be opened only by order of the court;
(7) that a trade secret or other confidential research, development, or commercial information not be disclosed or be disclosed only in a designated way;
(8) that the parties simultaneously file specified documents or information enclosed in sealed envelopes to be opened as directed by the court.
If a motion for protective order is denied in whole or in part, the court may, on such terms and conditions as are just, order that any party or person provide or permit discovery. The provisions of Rule 61.01 apply to the award of expenses incurred in relation to the motion.
In ruling on an objection that the discovery request creates an undue burden or expense, the court shall consider the issues in the case and the serving party's need for such information to prosecute or defend the case and may consider, among other things, the amount in controversy and the parties' relative resources in determining whether the proposed discovery burden or expense outweighs its benefit.
* * *
(g) Cooperation in Discovery. All parties shall make reasonable efforts to cooperate for the purpose of minimizing the burden or expense of discovery.
2. It is ordered that effective July 1, 2019, subdivision 58.01(c) of Rule 58 be and the same is hereby repealed and a new subdivision 58.01(c) adopted in lieu thereof to read as follows:
58.01 PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS AND THINGS AND ENTRY UPON LAND FOR INSPECTION AND OTHER PURPOSES
* * *
(c) Response. The requests shall be answered by each party to whom they are directed.
At the time of service, a certificate of service, but not the response, shall be filed with the court as provided in Rule 58.01(d).
(1) When Response is Due. Responses shall be served within 30 days after the service of the request. A defendant, however, shall not be required to respond to the request before the expiration of 45 days after the earlier of:
The court may allow a shorter or longer time.
(A) The date the defendant enters an appearance, or
(B) The date the defendant is served with process.
(B) The date the defendant is served with process.
The court may allow a shorter or longer time.
(2) Form. The title of the response shall identify the responding party and the number of the set of the requests. The response shall quote each request, including its original paragraph number, and immediately thereunder state that the requested items will be produced or the inspection and related activities will be permitted as requested, unless the request is objected to, in which event each reason for objection shall be stated in detail.
(3) Objections and Privileges. If information is withheld because of an objection, then each reason for the objection shall be stated. If a privilege or the work product doctrine is asserted as a reason for the objection, then without revealing the protected information, the objecting party shall state information that will permit others to assess the applicability of the privilege or work product doctrine.
(4) Method of Production. A party who produces documents for inspection shall produce them as they are kept in the usual course of business so long as this form is reasonably usable by the requesting party, or shall organize and label them to correspond with the categories in the request.
(5) Signing. The response shall be signed by the attorney or by the party if the party is not represented by an attorney.
(6) Service. The party to whom the requests were directed shall serve a signed original of the response and objections, if any, on the party that issued the requests and a copy upon all parties not in default. The certificate of service shall state the name of the party who issued the requests and the number of the set of requests.
(3) Objections and Privileges. If information is withheld because of an objection, then each reason for the objection shall be stated. If a privilege or the work product doctrine is asserted as a reason for the objection, then without revealing the protected information, the objecting party shall state information that will permit others to assess the applicability of the privilege or work product doctrine.
(4) Method of Production. A party who produces documents for inspection shall produce them as they are kept in the usual course of business so long as this form is reasonably usable by the requesting party, or shall organize and label them to correspond with the categories in the request.
(5) Signing. The response shall be signed by the attorney or by the party if the party is not represented by an attorney.
(6) Service. The party to whom the requests were directed shall serve a signed original of the response and objections, if any, on the party that issued the requests and a copy upon all parties not in default. The certificate of service shall state the name of the party who issued the requests and the number of the set of requests.
At the time of service, a certificate of service, but not the response, shall be filed with the court as provided in Rule 58.01(d).
* * *
3. It is ordered that notice of this order be published in the Journal of The Missouri Bar.
4. It is ordered that this order be published in the South Western Reporter.
Day – to – Day
_______________________________
ZEL M. FISCHER
Chief Justice
_______________________________
ZEL M. FISCHER
Chief Justice