Discovery Deficiency Meet-and-Confer Letter

DISCOVERY DEFICIENCY MEET-AND-CONFER LETTER

Washington State — CR 37

[LAW FIRM NAME]
[Street Address]
[City, WA ZIP]
Tel: [____________________] | Fax: [____________________]
[Email Address]

Date: [__/__/____]

VIA: ☐ Email ☐ Certified Mail ☐ Hand Delivery ☐ Overnight Courier

[Opposing Counsel Name]
[Law Firm Name]
[Street Address]
[City, State ZIP]

Re: [Plaintiff] v. [Defendant], [Superior Court], [County] County, Washington
Case No.: [________________________________]
Subject: Discovery Deficiencies — Good-Faith Meet-and-Confer Pursuant to CR 37(a)(4) / [LCR 37 if King County]

Dear [Opposing Counsel Name]:

We write on behalf of [Client Name] ("our client") pursuant to Washington Civil Rule 37(a)(4), which requires that any motion for an order compelling discovery be accompanied by a certification that the movant has in good faith conferred or attempted to confer with the party failing to make discovery in an effort to secure the information or material without court action.

This letter identifies specific deficiencies in the discovery responses served by [Responding Party] on [__/__/____] and constitutes our formal good-faith effort to resolve these disputes without judicial intervention. If the identified deficiencies are not cured by the deadline below, we will file a motion to compel under CR 37 and seek all available sanctions including attorney's fees and reasonable expenses. This letter will be submitted to the court in connection with any such motion.

I. WASHINGTON DISCOVERY FRAMEWORK — KEY RULES

Washington Interrogatory Rules: Washington Civil Rules (CR 33) do not impose a statewide interrogatory limit. However:

• King County (Seattle): Under LCR 26 / LCR 33, a party may serve no more than 40 interrogatories, including all discrete subparts, per opposing party (without pattern interrogatories per LCR 33).
• Other Counties: Check applicable local rules; Pierce, Snohomish, Spokane, and other counties may have their own limits or discovery practices.
• Parties may stipulate to different limits.

King County Specific Rules (Effective September 1, 2025): King County's Local Civil Rules (LCR) impose specific discovery limits. Check current LCR at King County Superior Court for the most current version.

II. APPLICABLE COURT AND LOCAL RULES

This matter is pending in [________________________________] County Superior Court. The following local rules apply in addition to the Washington Civil Rules:

☐ King County: LCR 26 (40 interrogatory limit), LCR 33 (pattern interrogatories), LCR 37 (meet-and-confer certification required in discovery motions), LCR 26 (25 RFA limit)
☐ Pierce County: Check Pierce County Local Rules
☐ Snohomish County: Check Snohomish County Local Rules
☐ Spokane County: Check Spokane County Local Rules
☐ Clark County: Check Clark County Local Rules
☐ Other: [________________________________] — Check applicable local rules

III. DEFICIENCIES IN INTERROGATORY RESPONSES

Pursuant to CR 33, [Responding Party]'s interrogatory answers served on [__/__/____] contain the following deficiencies:

Specific Interrogatory Deficiencies:

1. Interrogatory No. [____]: [Describe specifically. E.g., "Your answer to Interrogatory No. [____] states 'see documents produced' without identifying which documents respond to the interrogatory or their Bates numbers. Washington practice requires a specific, complete answer. Please amend."]

2. Interrogatory No. [____]: [Describe. E.g., "Your objection that this interrogatory is 'overbroad' is not supported by any specific showing of burden. Please identify what specific burden makes this interrogatory disproportionate, or withdraw the objection and answer."]

3. Interrogatory No. [____]: [Describe.]

IV. DEFICIENCIES IN REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION RESPONSES

Pursuant to CR 34, [Responding Party]'s responses to Requests for Production served on [__/__/____] contain the following deficiencies:

Specific RFP Deficiencies:

1. RFP No. [____]: [Describe specifically.]

2. RFP No. [____]: [Describe.]

3. RFP No. [____]: [Describe.]

V. DEFICIENCIES IN REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION RESPONSES

Pursuant to CR 36 (and LCR 26 in King County, which limits RFAs to 25 per party), [Responding Party]'s responses to Requests for Admission served on [__/__/____] contain the following deficiencies:

VI. ESI CONFERENCE REQUIREMENT — CR 26(i)

Washington Civil Rule CR 26(i) requires the parties to meet and confer regarding ESI discovery, including:

☐ The subjects on which discovery of ESI may be needed
☐ When discovery should be completed
☐ Preservation of ESI
☐ The form in which ESI should be produced
☐ The method for asserting and preserving privilege claims as to ESI

The parties ☐ have / ☐ have not yet conducted the required ESI conference. We propose addressing ESI issues at our meet-and-confer conference on the dates listed below.

Specific ESI deficiencies:

☐ ESI not produced in the form in which ordinarily maintained or in a reasonably usable form (CR 34(b)(2)(E))
☐ Metadata has been stripped from produced ESI; please confirm all produced ESI retains metadata
☐ Document families separated in production; re-produce maintaining family relationships
☐ No discussion of search terms, date ranges, or custodians; please be prepared to address at conference
☐ Other: [________________________________]

VII. PRIVILEGE LOG REQUIREMENTS

Under CR 26(b)(5), when a party withholds information otherwise discoverable by claiming privilege, it must expressly make the claim and describe the nature of the documents, communications, or things not produced in a manner enabling other parties to assess the claim. Your privilege log:

☐ Has not been provided.
☐ Has been provided but is deficient as follows:

☐ Does not identify the date of each withheld document
☐ Does not identify the author(s)
☐ Does not identify all recipients
☐ Does not specify the privilege type claimed
☐ Does not describe subject matter sufficiently
☐ Improperly withholds documents outside the scope of any privilege
☐ Other: [________________________________]

Please provide a complete and compliant privilege log by [__/__/____].

VIII. GENERAL OBJECTIONS — WASHINGTON LAW

Washington courts have repeatedly held that blanket, non-specific objections are insufficient under CR 33 and CR 34. The following objections in your responses are improper:

☐ Global "general objections" purporting to apply to all responses are invalid under Washington practice.
☐ Objections of "overly broad and unduly burdensome" without specific factual support are insufficient.
☐ Proportionality objections must be specific; general assertions of disproportionality are not adequate.
☐ Privilege claims without a privilege log are insufficient under CR 26(b)(5).
☐ Other: [________________________________]

IX. KING COUNTY SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS

If this case is pending in King County Superior Court, the following additional requirements apply under King County Local Civil Rules (effective September 1, 2025):

☐ LCR 26 / LCR 33: Interrogatory limit is 40 interrogatories per party (if pattern interrogatories not used per LCR 33).
☐ LCR 26: RFA limit is 25 requests for admission per party.
☐ LCR 37: Any motion related to discovery must include certification that the movant has made a good-faith effort to resolve the dispute before filing.
☐ LCR 4: Scheduling order may contain additional discovery deadlines and limitations specific to this case.
☐ Confirm compliance with the applicable case schedule entered by the court.

X. MEET-AND-CONFER AVAILABILITY

We propose the following times for a telephonic or video conference:

☐ [Day, Date] at [____] a.m./p.m. Pacific Time
☐ [Day, Date] at [____] a.m./p.m. Pacific Time
☐ [Day, Date] at [____] a.m./p.m. Pacific Time

Contact: [Attorney Name], [Phone Number], [Email]

If we do not receive a response within five (5) business days, we will file a motion to compel and certify our good-faith attempt to confer was not accepted.

XI. DEADLINE FOR SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSES

Please provide complete supplemental responses — supplemental interrogatory answers (with verification), additional document production, and a compliant privilege log — no later than:

[__/__/____] (14 calendar days from the date of this letter)

We are willing to discuss a brief extension for good cause if requested promptly.

XII. SANCTIONS WARNING — CR 37

CR 37(a)(4) provides that if a motion to compel is granted, the court shall require the party whose conduct necessitated the motion to pay the movant's reasonable expenses, including attorney's fees, unless:

• The motion was filed without the movant attempting in good faith to obtain the discovery;
• The opposing party's failure was substantially justified; or
• Other circumstances make an award unjust.

CR 37(b)(2) provides additional sanctions for failure to comply with a court order:

☐ Order establishing designated facts as true
☐ Order prohibiting the disobedient party from supporting or opposing claims or introducing certain evidence
☐ Order striking pleadings in whole or in part
☐ Order staying proceedings until the order is obeyed
☐ Order dismissing the action or any part thereof
☐ Order entering default judgment
☐ Order treating noncompliance as contempt of court

Washington courts have imposed severe sanctions, including evidence preclusion and dismissal, for egregious and persistent discovery abuse.

XIII. LITIGATION HOLD REMINDER

Please confirm that [Responding Party] maintains a litigation hold covering:

☐ Email and electronic communications from all relevant custodians
☐ Text messages and instant messages (Slack, Teams, WhatsApp, etc.)
☐ Physical documents and paper files
☐ Financial records and databases
☐ Cloud storage (SharePoint, Google Drive, Dropbox, etc.)
☐ Social media accounts (personal and business)
☐ Call logs and voicemail records

If any relevant evidence has been lost or destroyed, please disclose this in writing immediately.

XIV. RESERVATION OF RIGHTS

Our client reserves all rights, claims, and defenses. Nothing in this letter constitutes a waiver of any right, claim, or defense, or an admission of any fact or legal conclusion.

We look forward to your prompt and substantive response.

Sincerely,

[________________________________]
[Attorney Name], Esq.
[WSBA No.: ____________________]
[Law Firm Name]
[Address]
[Phone]
[Email]
Counsel for [Party Name]

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that on [__/__/____], a true copy of this letter was served upon the following counsel of record by the method indicated:

[Opposing Counsel Name]
[Law Firm]
[Address]
[Email]

☐ Electronic Mail
☐ First-Class U.S. Mail, postage prepaid
☐ Certified Mail, Return Receipt Requested
☐ Hand Delivery
☐ Overnight Courier

[________________________________]
[Attorney Name]
Date: [__/__/____]

Sources and References:

• CR 26 — Washington State Courts: https://www.courts.wa.gov/court_rules/?fa=court_rules.display&group=sup&set=cr&ruleid=supcr26
• CR 37 — Washington State Courts: https://www.courts.wa.gov/court_rules/pdf/CR/SUP_CR_37_00_00.pdf
• King County LCR 26: https://kingcounty.gov/en/dept/dja/courts-jails-legal-system/superior-court-local-rules/local-civil-rules/lcr-26
• King County LCR 37: https://kingcounty.gov/en/dept/dja/courts-jails-legal-system/superior-court-local-rules/local-civil-rules/lcr-37
• King County Local Rules (Sept. 1, 2025): https://www.courts.wa.gov/court_rules/pdf/lcr/17/SUP/LCR_King_SUP.pdf