What are Contention Interrogatories and How Are They Used in the Discovery Process?

Contention interrogatories attempt to clarify the basis or scope of the opposing party’s legal claims. Gov’t Employees Ins. Co. v. Clear Vision Windshield Repair, LLC, No: 6:16-cv-2077-Orl-28TBS, 2017 WL 1438426, at *5 (M.D. Fla. Apr. 24, 2017) (quotation and citations omitted). The Amendments to Rule 33 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (Interrogatories to Parties) clarify that “[o]pinion and contention interrogatories are used routinely” and “can be most useful in narrowing and sharpening issues.” See Fed. R. Civ. P. 33, advisory committee’s notes to the 1970 and 2007 amendments. Nonetheless, the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida Civil Discovery Handbook cautions that contention interrogatories should be employed “sparingly and, if used, should be designed (1) to target claims, defenses, or contentions that the propounding attorney reasonably suspects may be the proper subject of early dismissal or resolution or (2) to identify and narrow the scope of unclear claims, defenses, and contentions.” Middle District Discovery (2015) at IV(C)(2); see also Koster v. Landmark Amer. Ins. Co., No: 5:14-cv-689-Oc-37PRL, 2016 WL 3014605, at *4 (M.D. Fla. May 20, 2016). The Civil Discovery Handbook also provides that interrogatories “purport[ing] to require a detailed narrative of the opposing parties’ case [are] generally improper because they are overbroad and oppressive.” Middle District Discovery at IV(C)(2).

Please contact Joel Ewusiak for legal assistance with your specific matter.