Also known as: motions to compel
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A procedural device by which a requesting party seeks a court order directing an opposing party to comply with discovery obligations after good-faith efforts to resolve the dispute informally have failed. The court evaluates the validity of any objections and may award costs or impose sanctions for noncompliance.
Miranda Morales served document requests on Morgan Financial seeking years of archived email data. Morgan Financial identified the sources as not reasonably accessible due to undue cost and refused production. Morales filed a motion to compel. The court required Morgan Financial to demonstrate the burden before deciding whether good cause justified ordering production anyway.
Miles Montgomery sued after a police shooting and sought notes from Officer Redmond's sessions with social worker Karen Beyer. Beyer refused to produce the notes on privilege grounds. Montgomery filed a motion to compel. The court ordered production after determining the privilege did not shield the requested material.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Miguel Mendoza sued excess insurers and requested production of insurance policies to establish personal jurisdiction. The insurers objected on burden grounds and withheld documents. Mendoza filed a motion to compel. The court granted the motion after finding the requests relevant to the jurisdictional inquiry.
Mason McCarthy and other employees sued their employer for wrongful termination. The employer moved to compel arbitration under signed agreements. McCarthy opposed the motion. The court granted the motion after determining the agreements were enforceable and covered the statutory claims.
Marcus Mitchell sought discovery of attorney-client communications that the opposing party claimed were privileged. The district court ordered production. The producing party appealed the order. The appellate court treated the ruling as immediately appealable under the collateral order doctrine because it resolved an important privilege issue separate from the merits.
Ming Ma, a newspaper publisher, received a subpoena for confidential source information. Ma moved for a protective order while the requesting party filed a motion to compel. The court balanced the need for the information against First Amendment concerns and limited the scope of compelled production.
The requesting party must first attempt to resolve the dispute informally through good-faith conferral with the opposing party. Only after those efforts fail may the party file the motion under Rule 37(a).
Supporting sources
The court may impose sanctions under Rule 37(b), including striking claims, deeming facts established, excluding evidence, or dismissing the action. Monetary sanctions for expenses and fees are also available.
Supporting sources
Yes. The responding party must show that the ESI is not reasonably accessible because of undue burden or cost. The court may still order production if the requesting party demonstrates good cause under Rule 26(b)(2)(B).
Supporting sources
Yes. When a party objects on privilege grounds, the requesting party may file a motion to compel so the court can determine whether the privilege applies and whether the objection is valid.
Supporting sources
…Beyer also refused to produce any notes or reports from Officer Redmond's counseling sessions. The plaintiffs filed another motion to compel Karen Beyer to answer certain questions to which objections had been made and to produce all of her notes and reports on Mary Lu Redmond. After Karen Beyer's second deposition session, the…