Help us improve
Share bugs, ideas, or general feedback.
From in-court-docs
Assists with Indiana civil discovery under Trial Rules 26-37: drafting interrogatories, RFPs, RFAs, depositions, subpoenas, and motions to compel.
npx claudepluginhub codearranger/claude-legal --plugin in-court-docsHow this skill is triggered — by the user, by Claude, or both
Slash command
/in-court-docs:in-discoveryThe summary Claude sees in its skill listing — used to decide when to auto-load this skill
This skill governs all discovery activity in an Indiana civil
Guides technical evaluation of code review feedback: read fully, restate for understanding, verify against codebase, respond with reasoning or pushback before implementing.
Share bugs, ideas, or general feedback.
This skill governs all discovery activity in an Indiana civil case — pre-trial fact development through interrogatories, requests for production, requests for admission, depositions, and subpoenas. The authority is Indiana Trial Rules 26-37, which closely parallel the federal rules but include Indiana-specific caps and procedure (most notably the 25-interrogatory limit under T.R. 33(A) and the meet-and-confer rule under T.R. 37(E)).
NOT LEGAL ADVICE. Generated content is a drafting aid; verify against the current Indiana Trial Rules and the local rules of the venue county before serving or filing discovery.
T.R. 26(B)(1) defines the scope:
"Parties may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, which is relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action, whether it relates to the claim or defense of the party seeking discovery or to the claim or defense of any other party. ... It is not ground for objection that the information sought will be inadmissible at the trial if the information sought appears reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence."
This is the same wording as the pre-2015 federal Rule 26(b); Indiana did NOT adopt the 2015 federal "proportionality" amendment to FRCP 26(b)(1). Indiana discovery is therefore broader than federal discovery on the proportionality dimension. The familiar federal "proportional to the needs of the case" factors do not appear in Indiana's rule.
Limits:
The 25-interrogatory cap. T.R. 33(A) limits interrogatories to "25 in number including all discrete subparts." Counting subparts: the Indiana Supreme Court has held that discrete subparts each count, paralleling FRCP 33(a). To exceed the cap, the propounding party must obtain leave of court or written stipulation.
Marion Civil Division's CPC § IV.B encourages parties to stipulate to a higher cap rather than litigate the issue. The typical stipulation is 50 interrogatories.
Response deadline. T.R. 33(C): 30 days after service. Unlike federal practice (Rule 33(b)(4)), Indiana does NOT add 3 days for service by mail — the 30-day clock runs from the date of service, period. Service-by-mail extension applies only to the 20-day answer rule under T.R. 6(C).
Form of response. Each interrogatory restated, then "Answer:" followed by the response. If objection, state the objection with particularity (T.R. 33(C)(2)). Verification by oath is required (T.R. 33(C)).
Common objections to interrogatories:
| Objection | When to assert |
|---|---|
| Overbreadth | Interrogatory not limited in time or scope |
| Vagueness | Defined terms unclear |
| Privileged | Attorney-client, work product |
| Burdensome | Compilation requires extensive effort |
| Compound | Single interrogatory disguised as multiple |
| Exceeds 25-cap | Counting the subparts pushes past the cap |
No numerical cap on Requests for Production (RFPs) in Indiana. Unlike interrogatories, parties may serve as many RFPs as needed, though courts will quash unreasonably burdensome requests.
Response deadline. T.R. 34(B): 30 days after service. Each request must be answered (production or objection) within 30 days.
Form of response. Each request restated, followed by "Response: Documents responsive to this request are attached as [Exhibit A / Bates 0001-0100]" or an objection.
Electronically stored information (ESI). T.R. 34(A)(2) permits requests for ESI. Indiana adopted electronic-discovery rules in 2008, paralleling FRCP 34. Specify the form of production (PDF, native file with metadata, etc.) in the request.
Critical rule. T.R. 36(A): if a request for admission is not answered or objected to within 30 days of service, the matter is deemed admitted. A pro se litigant who misses the 30-day window has waived the disputed facts.
Use cases:
Response options. Within 30 days, the responding party must either:
A general denial or a non-responsive "deny" will be treated as an admission (T.R. 36(A)(2)). The 30-day deadline is jurisdictional — motion to extend must be filed before the 30 days expire.
T.R. 30 governs oral depositions. Indiana practice closely mirrors federal:
Number of depositions: no fixed cap in T.R. 30. Marion CPC recommends parties limit to 10 depositions per side absent stipulation.
T.R. 45 governs subpoenas. Two forms:
Service of a subpoena: by Sheriff or any non-party adult, with a witness-fee tender ($10 plus mileage). Marion LR49-TR45 requires the subpoena to include a copy of T.R. 45(C) (rights of the recipient).
For documents-only subpoenas to non-parties, T.R. 45(B)(1) requires notice to all parties at least 5 days before service so they can object.
T.R. 37(E) was added in 2008 (renumbered in 2014). Before filing a motion to compel, the moving party MUST:
"[I]n good faith confer or attempt to confer with the person or party failing to make the discovery in an effort to resolve the matter without court action."
Practical points:
When meet-and-confer fails, file a Motion to Compel under T.R. 37(A). Required components:
Sanctions under T.R. 37(B) — if the court grants the motion and the noncompliant party still refuses to respond, the court may:
Indiana's leading case on discovery sanctions: Wright v. Miller, 989 N.E.2d 324 (Ind. 2013) (affirming discretion of trial court in sanctioning a party for repeated discovery violations).
Indiana Small Claims Rules (S.C.R.) 6 limits discovery in small- claims cases:
"No interrogatories, requests for production of documents, requests for admission, or depositions shall be allowed except upon order of the court."
Marion County Small Claims practice rarely orders discovery; the court expects the parties to be ready at trial without formal pretrial discovery. Lake County's County Division small-claims dockets follow the same restriction.
For Civil Plenary (PL), Civil Collection (CC), and Civil Tort (CT) cases in Marion / Lake Superior Courts and county Circuit / Superior Courts, full T.R. 26-37 discovery applies.
Day 0 Issue joined (Answer filed)
Day 60 Joint CMS filed
Day 90 First status conference; discovery officially open
Day 120 First wave of discovery served
Day 150 Discovery responses due (30 days from service)
Day 180 Meet-and-confer over deficiencies
Day 210 Motion to compel filed if needed
Day 240 Second wave of discovery served (after document review)
Day 270 Depositions begin
Day 330 Expert disclosures (typically by court order)
Day 360 Discovery cut-off (typically 60-90 days before trial)
in-statewide-format for T.R. 5(E) / T.R. 10 baselinein-marion / in-lake / in-county-courts for venue-specific
meet-and-confer protocolsin-pro-se for self-represented discovery scope and pitfallsin-deadlines for the 30-day response calculationin-fact-check to verify case citationsin-draft-motion for the motion-to-compel scaffolderreferences/discovery-rules-summary.md — T.R. 26-37 quick-lookreferences/interrogatory-templates.md — pattern interrogatory
banks for civil collection, contract, tortreferences/rfp-templates.md — pattern RFP banksreferences/rfa-templates.md — pattern RFA banksreferences/motion-to-compel-template.md — fully drafted
scaffold with meet-and-confer certificateNOT LEGAL ADVICE. Generated content is a drafting aid; verify against current rules and case law before filing.