Forcing the Other Side to Present Their Evidence Prior to Trial

[Arazu Toth]

My question involves court procedures for the state of: Arizona

What process does one utilize to acquire any and all evidence the opposing side is claiming exists to support their counterclaims prior to trial? For example if I move for Summary Judgment I want the Court to know the opposing side has no evidence to support their claims (note we're talking about documentation, etc. not evidence that would require deposition, etc).

I don't want to waste my discovery tools in order to disprove their allegations; but I want to demand they present their evidence supporting their allegations.

For example, they may claim "we have a copy of a document that shows you X"

...I want to see that document... prior to trial.. and prior to my filing for SJ. What's the technique to force them to provide this?

[cmre3456]

These are some discovery methods you can use for what you want and I'd use all three.

1. A request for documents. Google and see if you can find some samples.

2. A request for admissions. Google...

3. A subpoena duces tecum. That's where you subpoena them for a deposition, and request that they bring documents with them, of which you can keep a copy. Again, google for what that looks like.

Every time I used the term "request" it really is a demand they have to comply with.

[Arazu Toth]

OK, but why should I have to waste the tools which support discovery for my case and allegations in order to acquire the evidence they claim to have in support of theirs? I thought they had to share that evidence with me without having to demand it through RFA/RPD/NUI?

Isn't there another method to acquire the evidence they claim to have to support their allegations?

[cmre3456]

Isn't there another method to acquire the evidence they claim to have to support their allegations?

Nope. That's how it's done. Your "requests" are demands backed by the court. If they don't comply, the court will require it of them. You can't just call them and ask, LOL. Well, I guess you can if you want to be told to get lost, LOL.

If you are going to handle this yourself, you have to do the work. Otherwise, you need an attorney.

[Arazu Toth]

I understand; I'm just surprised. This means the opposing side could make completely frivolous allegations which "meet the pleading standards" yet have no supportive evidence of any kid, and are designed to waste the discovery tools which are supposed to be used in order to prove the plaintiff's case, not the defendants' counterclaims.

So, I'm required to use my limited discovery inquiries in order to get them to provide their evidence... Wow. And of course, this appears to be exactly what they are doing...

The other disconnect I have is related to the documentation they "claim" to have yet do not need to get from me. When are they required to submit it to the record as evidence? It's almost as if they're withholding materials to support their claims, and I do not know as a matter of process when they are supposed to submit these materials to evidence. If I'm to nail them not only for my allegations in SJ but also for fabricating theirs, I need to know they've missed their "final timeline" to submit their own evidence in support of their counterclaims... where is that defined?

[cmre3456]

I think you're missing the point. They don't have to provide you with anything unless you go through the process of demanding it in discovery. It doesn't really sound as if you want to be doing this and you need an attorney.

You have two ways to demand documents. You can serve them with a subpoena duces tecum and they show up for a deposition, bringing a range of documents you requested. The second is that you can serve them with a request for documents.

Again, check your court's rules for proper service and the proper form.