I guess I should not make generalized comments from home, without any reference material. As to Federal law, applicable in the ZSUN case, you are generally correct. However, a defendant may serve RFAs on the plaintiff at any time after commencement of the action, while a plaintiff has to wait until he serves the summons and complaint. FRCP 36(a). In addition, any party can serve a depo notice at any time, even before the early disclosure meeting (but the depo itself may have to wait). So theoretically, the defendants could get a jump on plaintiffs, but I don't think I would do that, as the notice may constitute "an appearance" by the defendant prior to service of the summons. In addition, it requires notice to all parties, which may be difficult at this stage.
My comment was based on California law (not applicable in the ZSUN case), which allows defendants to serve discovery requests prior to plaintiffs, if they are quick about it. Defendants may serve notices of deposition any time, while plaintiffs have a hold on serving depo notices until 20 days after service of summons. CCP 2025(b)(2). The hold on plaintiffs for interrogatories is 10 days. CCP 2030(b). The hold on RFAs is 10 days. CCP 2033(b). Document requests also have 10 day hold for plaintiffs. CCP 2031(b). Therefore, if defendants are served with a summons, they can immediately serve discovery and cause the plaintiffs to cough up documents, rogs, RFAs, and witnesses before the defendant has to. |
