TO: Joint Procedure Committee
FROM: Mike Hagburg
DATE: January 9, 2009
RE: Rule 33, N.D.R.Civ.P., Interrogatories to Parties
Staff has prepared amendments to Rule 33 based on the federal form and style amendments. The amendments are intended make the rule more easily understood and to make style and terminology consistent throughout the rules. The amendments also aim to modernize the rule, removing references to obsolete authority and practices.
Rule 33 differs from the federal rule and the federal rule contains provisions not found in the North Dakota version. Therefore, the Committee should examine the proposed amendments to Rule 33 closely to see whether they are desirable and consistent with North Dakota practice.
Here are some things to look at in the proposal:
Rule 33(a)(2) contains language moved from subdivision (c) of the existing rule.
Rule 33(b)(1)(B) is a rewrite of existing material that is in subdivision (a) of the existing rule. The Committee may wish to discuss whether any other sort of business association, such as a limited liability company, should be listed or whether the proposed language is adequate to cover potential business parties. In general, the proposed (b) subdivision of the rule contains the same material as the existing rule but in a different order. The federal rule received a similar reorganization.
The language of existing Rule 33(b)(6) was deleted from the federal rule as redundant and is also deleted from the proposed amendments to the North Dakota rule. The unique state provision on repetitive questions is renumbered as 33(b)(6). The second sentence of this provision is highlighted in the draft the Committee may wish to consider whether the language says what it means to say.
The proposed amendments to Rule 33 are attached along with a copy of the amendments
to the federal rule.