notice to admit/interrogatories

Just search discover or interrogatories. It is imperative you answer the requests for admission on time.

 

If you fail to respond to the rogs, they can move to compel. Therefore, answer them. However, yes, you can certainly object to the call of the questions.

Requests to admit are a different animal. While you can object, if you don't answer the questions will be deemed to have been answered in their favor.

 

Since you appeared and answered, this is the next step. The only question I have is whether or not you are going to give them something to do or not. Discovery works both ways. In fact, it can be more important for the defedant who needs to know what the other side actually has. Note that time is running out. If you dilly dally, they could file a motion for summary judgment before you are ready.

 

If you answer them yourself, then you can say that you alone answered the questions. All my responses are GENERAL and not intended as "answers" to any of your int questions. Dumb Bob is NOT a lawyer and can't give you specific legal advice, or in fact any advice of a legal nature at all. Plus, he's Dumb, I would only get advice from a smart bob or joe or fred.

You can object on any grounds at all, the question is whether or not if it is taken before the judge, you will have your objection sustained. To find that out, you will need to read your court rules, your case law, etc.

If they had documents, why would they bother to ask you the questions? I guess it's something to do. But think about this, if you were in an auto accident and the other side sent you questions asking whether the light was red or green, they wouldn't necessarily have "documents" available to prove that. So it would seem that documents aren't needed just to ask questions.

How do you know what they have? You know what they included with the complaint, right? Is that ALL that they have? This is why discovery is so important to a defense team. If you are wondering how to do discovery in your jurisdiction, consider that a lawyer just sent you how he does it in your jurisdiction. Such the deal. (Of course maybe the lawyer is a goof, I'd still read all the rules and case law and secondary sources to make sure)

The first is questions which you have to answer under oath. The second is statements which you admit or deny (or possibly amplify on or object to or even more than one of the forgoing at the same time) used to fine up the issues for summary judgment and if needed trial. If you admit something, that means that the other side doesn't have to take the time and expense to prove it. If you deny something that you should've admited, you can be charged for the cost the other side went through proving that part of the case. So it saves money all around!

 

You need to file a verification and have it notarized.

Just deny if you don't know the affirmative answer to their requests.

 

Didn't they include notary language with the questions?

I think you should do whatever you are going to do specifically with each of the admission/denials. If you don't do this correctly, I would think they will attempt to use that to cause all of the admissions to be admitted. Since they probably ask for basically admitting everything, you would be sunk.

 

I found this website, it gives a NY state overview, trying to explain the use of secondary sources: http://people.hofstra.edu/lisa_a_spar/nyprac/nyprac.htm

This seems to be at least some of the court rules for New York: http://www.courts.state.ny.us/rules/index.shtml

This seems to be the legislature's laws related to the subject of courts in New York, which seems to be extensive. Go down to "CVP" and click:
http://public.leginfo.state.ny.us/menugetf.cgi?COMMONQUERY=LAWS

Read this for an example of case law explaining things: http://vertumnus.courts.state.ny.us/claims/html/2001-001-039.html

You might look at this case and follow each of its citing references that are relevant to your situation, if any happen to be: 11 Misc.3d 219, 807 N.Y.S.2d 284, 2005 N.Y. Slip Op. 25536.

This is from the court rules cited above:
http://www.courts.state.ny.us/rules/trialcourts/202.shtml

I've noticed cases and court rules referring to the "CPLR", see supra, and that it seems like it might be the "CVP" that I found the URL to. Perhaps one is an old term for the other. I would start looking for various interesting laws to read such as Rule 4518 of the CVP, perhaps to include at least the following list: Rule 4539, all of Article 31, specifically Rule 3133 of article 31:

Rule 3212 deals with summary judgment, which generally comes after admissions and interrogatories. I can't really reproduce all of this stuff here, but you might want to read it anyway. Note that this material is NOT enough. There will be case law and secondary sources that explain what doesn't make perfect sense in the various rules and laws.

I would attempt to get control of the laws and rules that are relevant. That is, I would download the ones that are important and put them in a file that you can annotate, at least make notes about.

 

This seems to have the New York code in an easier to download format. I don't know how current it is. The other site was, I thought, the government site (it is .us and not .gov however).

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/nycodes/c16.html