Discovery Deficiency Meet-and-Confer Letter

DISCOVERY DEFICIENCY MEET-AND-CONFER LETTER

Wisconsin — Wis. Stat. § 804.12

[LAW FIRM NAME]
[Street Address]
[City, WI 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], [Circuit Court], [County] County, Wisconsin
Case No.: [________________________________]
Subject: Discovery Deficiencies — Good-Faith Conference Pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 804.12(1)(b)

Dear [Opposing Counsel Name]:

We write on behalf of [Client Name] ("our client") pursuant to Wisconsin Statute § 804.12(1)(b), which requires that any motion for an order compelling discovery include a certification that the movant has in good faith conferred or attempted to confer with the person or party failing to make discovery in an effort to obtain it 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 before seeking judicial relief. If the identified deficiencies are not cured by the deadline stated below, we will file a motion to compel under Wis. Stat. § 804.12 and seek all available sanctions, including attorney's fees and reasonable expenses. This letter will be submitted to the court with any such motion.

2018 Discovery Amendments Note: Wisconsin's discovery rules were substantially amended by 2017 Wis. Act 235, effective July 1, 2018, for cases filed on or after that date. Key changes include: (1) a 25-interrogatory limit (Wis. Stat. § 804.08(1)(am)); (2) a limit of 10 depositions per side (Wis. Stat. § 804.045); (3) a requirement to confer before serving ESI discovery (Wis. Stat. § 804.01(2)(ng)); and (4) amendments to expert witness discovery. Verify whether these rules apply to this case based on the filing date.

I. WISCONSIN DISCOVERY FRAMEWORK — KEY STATUTES

Wisconsin 25-Interrogatory Limit: Under Wis. Stat. § 804.08(1)(am) (effective July 1, 2018), each party may serve no more than 25 interrogatories, including all discrete subparts, without stipulation or court order. This limit applies to cases filed on or after July 1, 2018.

Pre-2018 Cases: For cases filed before July 1, 2018, the old rules (without the interrogatory limit) may apply. Confirm the applicable rule set based on the case filing date.

ESI Conference Requirement: Under Wis. Stat. § 804.01(2)(ng), no party may serve a request to produce ESI or respond to an interrogatory by producing ESI until after the parties have conferred regarding: subjects of ESI discovery, timing, preservation, form of production, and method for asserting privilege claims.

II. DEFICIENCIES IN INTERROGATORY RESPONSES

Pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 804.08, [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 the specific documents by Bates number or description. Wisconsin practice requires that interrogatory answers be complete and specific. Please amend to identify the responsive documents with specificity."]

2. Interrogatory No. [____]: [Describe. E.g., "Your objection that this interrogatory is 'overbroad' does not explain in what respect it is overbroad or what information you would be willing to provide. Please withdraw the objection and answer fully, or propose a specific narrowing."]

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

III. DEFICIENCIES IN REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION RESPONSES

Pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 804.09, [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.]

IV. DEFICIENCIES IN REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION RESPONSES

Pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 804.11, [Responding Party]'s responses to Requests for Admission served on [__/__/____] contain the following deficiencies:

V. ESI CONFERENCE — Wis. Stat. § 804.01(2)(ng)

Under Wisconsin's 2018 discovery amendments (Wis. Stat. § 804.01(2)(ng)), parties must confer before serving ESI discovery or responding to interrogatories by producing ESI. This conference must address:

☐ 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

Status of ESI conference: ☐ Not yet held — must be scheduled before ESI discovery proceeds
☐ Held on [__/__/____] but the following issues remain unresolved: [________________________________]

Specific ESI deficiencies:
☐ ESI not produced in the form ordinarily maintained or reasonably usable form (Wis. Stat. § 804.09(2)(a))
☐ Metadata has been stripped from produced ESI
☐ Document families separated in production
☐ Other: [________________________________]

VI. PRIVILEGE LOG REQUIREMENTS

Under Wis. Stat. § 804.01(2)(e), when a party withholds information otherwise discoverable by claiming privilege, it must expressly make the claim and describe the nature of the withheld documents 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 (attorney-client, work product, other)
☐ Does not describe subject matter with sufficient specificity
☐ Improperly withholds documents outside the scope of any privilege
☐ Other: [________________________________]

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

VII. GENERAL OBJECTIONS — WISCONSIN LAW

Wisconsin courts disfavor boilerplate, non-specific objections. The following objections in your responses are improper:

☐ Global "general objections" purporting to apply to all responses are invalid under Wisconsin practice.
☐ Objections of "overly broad and unduly burdensome" without specific factual support are insufficient.
☐ Proportionality objections under Wis. Stat. § 804.01(2)(a) must identify specific factors; general assertions are inadequate.
☐ Privilege claims without a privilege log are insufficient under Wis. Stat. § 804.01(2)(e).
☐ Other: [________________________________]

VIII. LOCAL COURT CONSIDERATIONS

Wisconsin circuit courts in certain counties may have local rules or practices supplementing the discovery statutes. Please confirm compliance with:

☐ Milwaukee County: Check Milwaukee County Circuit Court local rules and judge-specific standing orders.
☐ Dane County (Madison): Check Dane County Circuit Court local rules and standing orders.
☐ Waukesha County: Check Waukesha County local rules.
☐ Brown County (Green Bay): Check Brown County local rules.
☐ Other county: [________________________________]

IX. MEET-AND-CONFER AVAILABILITY

Pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 804.12(1)(b), we are required to certify a good-faith conference before filing a motion to compel. We propose the following times:

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

X. 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 may grant a brief extension for good cause upon timely request.

XI. SANCTIONS WARNING — Wis. Stat. § 804.12

Wis. Stat. § 804.12(1)(c) 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 a good-faith attempt to confer;
• The noncompliant party's conduct was substantially justified; or
• Other circumstances make an award unjust.

Wis. Stat. § 804.12(2) provides additional sanctions for failure to comply with a court order:

☐ Order establishing designated facts as true for purposes of the action
☐ 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 against the disobedient party
☐ Order treating noncompliance as contempt of court

Wisconsin courts enforce discovery obligations rigorously and have imposed significant sanctions for willful non-compliance.

XII. 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 records
☐ Financial records and databases
☐ Cloud storage (SharePoint, Google Drive, Dropbox, etc.)
☐ Social media accounts
☐ Call logs and voicemail records

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

XIII. 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 response.

Sincerely,

[________________________________]
[Attorney Name], Esq.
[WI Bar 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:

• Wis. Stat. § 804.08 — Interrogatories (2025): https://law.justia.com/codes/wisconsin/chapter-804/section-804-08/
• Wis. Stat. § 804.12 — Failure to Make Discovery (2024): https://law.justia.com/codes/wisconsin/chapter-804/section-804-12/
• Wis. Stat. § 804.01 — General Provisions (2024): https://law.justia.com/codes/wisconsin/chapter-804/section-804-01/
• Wisconsin 2018 Discovery Amendments — Stafford Law: https://www.staffordlaw.com/blog/appellate-law/the-final-countdown-changes-to-discovery-rules-and-more-await-litigants-sta/
• Wisconsin New Discovery Rules — von Briesen: https://www.vonbriesen.com/legal-news/3637/seven-things-to-know-about-changes-to-wisconsin-civil-procedure
• Wisconsin Court System (wicourts.gov): https://www.wicourts.gov