Dear Helen,

It is very important.

First, you state the requests for admission.

Then, form interrogatory 17.1 permits you to obtain the facts, contentions, evidence on the issues on which their denials are based.

So this way you get to find out the basis of their positions on the disputed issues.

Wishing you the best of luck.

Stan Stern

ssternesq@aol.com

310-487-9834

Form Interrogatory 17.1 asks the responding party to state, for each request for admission which is not answered with an unqualified admission, the following: (a) the number of the request; (b) all facts upon which the response is based; (c) the names, addresses and telephone numbers of all persons having knowledge of those facts; and (d) to identify all documents and other tangible things that support the response and the name, address and telephone number of the person who has each document or thing.

Making a full response to 17.1 can involve a very large burden for the responding party and its attorney. Therefore, a 17.1 request is sometimes used for the negative purpose of burdening the responding party with work and expense.

On the other hand, the Judicial Council didn't adopt 17.1 to encourage attorneys to be jerks. It can serve a very useful role in extracting evidentiary material, or leads to evidence, when properly used (including honest, heads-up responses). If a Request for Admission is worth making, then it's probably a good idea to serve a 17.1 request along with it, or them. That way, when the other party denies that the light was red, you'll also find out whether the party claims it was green, or admits that it was yellow but not yet red, or maybe asserts that it was burned out.