Discovery Meet-and-Confer Letter

DISCOVERY MEET-AND-CONFER LETTER

(Initial Planning Conference Request — Pre-Dispute)

State of California

[LAW FIRM LETTERHEAD]
[Firm Name]
[Address Line 1]
[Address Line 2]
[City, State, ZIP]
[Phone] | [Fax] | [Email]

[__/__/____]

VIA: ☐ Email ☐ U.S. Mail ☐ Overnight Courier ☐ Hand Delivery ☐ Electronic Service (CRC 2.251)

[Opposing Counsel Name]
[Law Firm Name]
[Address Line 1]
[Address Line 2]
[City, State, ZIP]

Re: [Case Name], [Court Name], Case No. [________________________________]
Re: Request for Discovery Planning Conference — CCP § 2016.040; CRC Rule 3.724

Dear [Opposing Counsel Name]:

PURPOSE OF THIS LETTER

We write on behalf of our client, [________________________________], to initiate a discovery planning conference in the above-referenced matter. This letter is not a discovery deficiency letter. It is sent pursuant to the spirit of California Code of Civil Procedure § 2016.040, which defines "meet and confer" as an honest attempt by the parties to resolve a difference in a good faith, reasonable, informal manner, and California Rules of Court, Rule 3.724, which requires counsel to meet and confer at least 30 days before the first scheduled trial date on all issues related to discovery.

California's discovery system differs significantly from federal practice: there are no initial disclosure requirements by default in California state court; discovery begins upon service of the summons; and the meet-and-confer requirement under CCP § 2016.040 applies before any discovery motion may be filed. This letter serves to proactively establish a cooperative discovery framework and resolve any foreseeable issues before they require court intervention.

We invite you to schedule a discovery planning conference at your earliest convenience.

CURRENT CASE POSTURE

• Date Complaint Filed: [__/__/____]
• Date Answer Filed: [__/__/____]
• Case Management Conference (CMC) Date: [__/__/____]
• Trial Date: [__/__/____]
• Fast-Track / General Track: ☐ Fast Track (120-day CMC) ☐ General ☐ Complex designation pending
• JCCP / Complex Litigation Designation: ☐ Yes ☐ No ☐ Pending

SECTION 1: INITIAL DISCLOSURES / DOCUMENT EXCHANGE

Unlike federal courts, California state courts do not require automatic initial disclosures under a Rule 26(a) equivalent absent a local rule or court order. However, early voluntary exchange of key documents and witness information can significantly streamline litigation.

We propose the following voluntary early disclosures:

☐ Each party will voluntarily identify key witnesses and the substance of their anticipated testimony by [__/__/____].
☐ Each party will voluntarily produce non-privileged key documents within [____] days of this conference.
☐ Each party will provide a preliminary damages summary by [__/__/____].
☐ No voluntary disclosures — the parties will proceed with formal discovery requests.

SECTION 2: PROPOSED DISCOVERY CONFERENCE AGENDA

We propose the following agenda for the discovery planning conference. Please advise if you would like to add topics.

A. Claims, Defenses, and Early Resolution

☐ Brief summary of each party's principal claims and defenses
☐ Identification of threshold legal issues for potential early motion practice
☐ Settlement possibilities and timing
☐ Early neutral evaluation, mediation, or other ADR (required at CMC under many local rules)

B. Scope and Proportionality of Discovery

☐ Relevant time period: [________________________________]
☐ Key custodians and departments likely to have relevant documents
☐ Whether discovery should be sequenced or phased
☐ Breadth of anticipated discovery: ☐ Narrow (single incident) ☐ Moderate ☐ Broad (systemic practices)

C. Electronically Stored Information (ESI)

California's discovery rules apply to ESI under CCP § 2031.010 et seq. and the California Electronic Discovery Act (CCP § 2016.020 et seq.). There is no formal ESI protocol requirement absent local rule, but proactive agreement avoids disputes.

☐ ESI custodians per side (anticipated: [____])
☐ Data sources: ☐ Email (platform: [____]) ☐ Shared drives ☐ Mobile devices/texts/iMessage ☐ Cloud (Google Drive, OneDrive, Dropbox) ☐ Databases ☐ Social media ☐ Backup tapes ☐ Other: [________________________________]
☐ Production format: ☐ Native ☐ TIFF with OCR text ☐ PDF ☐ Other: [________________________________]
☐ Metadata fields to be produced: [________________________________]
☐ De-duplication: ☐ Global ☐ Per-custodian
☐ Proposed keyword search terms — exchange by [__/__/____]
☐ Date range for collection: from [__/__/____] to [__/__/____]
☐ Stipulated ESI protocol: ☐ To be negotiated ☐ Use Los Angeles Superior Court model ☐ Other: [________________________________]

D. Privilege Log and Protective Order

☐ Privilege log format: ☐ Document-by-document ☐ Categorical
☐ Required fields: date, author, recipient(s), description/subject, privilege asserted, document type
☐ Timing of privilege log production: within [____] days of each production
☐ Clawback / inadvertent disclosure agreement: ☐ Yes ☐ No
☐ Protective order for confidential information: ☐ Yes ☐ No
☐ Deadline to file stipulated protective order: [__/__/____]
☐ Sensitive categories anticipated: ☐ Trade secrets (Cal. Civ. Code § 3426) ☐ PHI ☐ Personnel/payroll records ☐ Attorney-client ☐ Attorney work product ☐ Other: [________________________________]

E. Discovery Limits and Scheduling

California generally limits interrogatories to 35 specially prepared interrogatories per set (CCP § 2030.030), plus unlimited form interrogatories. Depositions are generally limited to seven hours per witness (CCP § 2025.290). There is no express limit on RFPs, but proportionality applies.

☐ Specially prepared interrogatories per set: ☐ Default (35) ☐ Modified: [____] per set
☐ Total sets: ☐ No limit agreed ☐ Limit: [____] sets
☐ Deposition time per witness: ☐ Default (7 hours) ☐ Extended for key witnesses: [________________________________]
☐ Total deposition days per side: [____] days
☐ Expert deposition scheduling: [________________________________]
☐ Discovery cutoff: [__/__/____]
☐ Expert witness designation (initial / rebuttal): [__/__/____] / [__/__/____]

F. Deposition Scheduling and Logistics

☐ Priority witnesses for early deposition: [________________________________]
☐ Preferred deposition locations: [________________________________]
☐ Remote depositions (Cal. R. Ct. 3.670): ☐ Agreed ☐ Not agreed ☐ Case-by-case
☐ PMK/PMQ depositions (corporate designee): ☐ Yes ☐ No
☐ Videotape depositions: ☐ Yes — all ☐ Yes — key witnesses only ☐ No

G. Third-Party Discovery

☐ Anticipated third-party subpoenas (CCP § 1985 et seq.): ☐ Yes (identify: [________________________________]) ☐ No
☐ Consumer records subpoenas (CCP § 1985.3): applicable? ☐ Yes ☐ No
☐ Employment records subpoenas (CCP § 1985.6): applicable? ☐ Yes ☐ No
☐ Advance notice of subpoenas: [____] days agreed

H. Preservation and Litigation Hold

☐ Confirm each party has implemented a litigation hold.
☐ Identify data sources subject to automatic deletion (email auto-purge, etc.).
☐ Agreement on obligations to preserve social media content.
☐ Agree to notify the other party before changing any preservation hold.

I. Separate Statement Requirements

California discovery motions generally require a "separate statement" setting forth each discovery request in dispute, the response, and the reasons for compelling further response. To reduce the likelihood of motion practice:

☐ Agree to informal resolution before formal motions: ☐ Yes ☐ No
☐ Timeline for responding to informal dispute letters: [____] days
☐ Preferred informal dispute method: ☐ Letter ☐ Phone/video call ☐ Informal court conference (CCP § 2016.080)

J. Informal Discovery Conference (CCP § 2016.080)

California Code of Civil Procedure § 2016.080 provides that the court may hold an informal discovery conference to resolve discovery disputes without a formal noticed motion. Either party may request such a conference.

☐ Agree to request an informal discovery conference before filing any discovery motion: ☐ Yes ☐ No

SECTION 3: PROPOSED DATES FOR CONFERENCE

We are available for the discovery planning conference on the following dates:

Option 1: [__/__/____] at [____]:00 [____]M (PT)
Option 2: [__/__/____] at [____]:00 [____]M (PT)
Option 3: [__/__/____] at [____]:00 [____]M (PT)

Preferred format: ☐ Telephone ☐ Zoom/Video ☐ In person at: [________________________________]

SECTION 4: CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE (CMC) COORDINATION

The parties are required to file a Case Management Statement (Judicial Council Form CM-110) at least 15 days before the Case Management Conference. We should coordinate on the following CMC statement items that affect discovery:

☐ Stipulate to case management order addressing discovery schedule
☐ Agree on ADR/mediation timing
☐ Confirm discovery timeline for inclusion in CMC statement
☐ Address anticipated discovery issues in CMC statement

SECTION 5: REQUEST FOR RESPONSE

Please respond no later than [__/__/____] ([____] days from the date of this letter) to:

1. Confirm your availability for the discovery planning conference;
2. Propose any additions or modifications to the agenda; and
3. Advise on any voluntary disclosures your client may be willing to provide.

We are committed to efficient, cooperative, and proportionate discovery in this matter.

Respectfully submitted,

[________________________________]
[Attorney Name]
[California State Bar Number: ____________________]
[Law Firm Name]
[Address]
[Phone] | [Email]
Counsel for [________________________________]

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that on [__/__/____], a true and correct copy of the foregoing was served on the following by:

☐ Electronic service pursuant to Cal. R. Ct. 2.251 to: [________________________________]
☐ U.S. First Class Mail, postage prepaid, to: [________________________________]
☐ Other: [________________________________]

[________________________________]
[Attorney Name]

ATTACHMENTS

☐ Attachment A — Proposed ESI Search Terms
☐ Attachment B — Draft Stipulated Protective Order
☐ Attachment C — Draft Clawback/Non-Waiver Agreement
☐ Attachment D — Draft Discovery Schedule / Timeline

SOURCES AND REFERENCES

• CCP § 2016.040 (Meet and Confer Definition): https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/
• CCP § 2016.080 (Informal Discovery Conference): https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/
• California Rules of Court, Rule 3.724: https://www.courts.ca.gov/
• California Electronic Discovery Act (CCP §§ 2016.020 et seq.): https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/
• Judicial Council Form CM-110 (Case Management Statement): https://www.courts.ca.gov/forms.htm