HLS 14RS-778 ORIGINAL
Page 1 of 5
CODING: Words in struck through type are deletions from existing law; words underscored
are additions.
Regular Session, 2014
HOUSE BILL NO. 607
BY REPRESENTATIVE ABRAMSON
(On Recommendation of the Louisiana State Law Institute)
CIVIL/PROCEDURE: Provides for continuous revision of the Code of Civil Procedure
AN ACT1
To amend and reenact Code of Civil Procedure Articles 1035, 1425(C), 1462(B)(1), and2
1469(4), relative to the continuous revision of the Code of Civil Procedure; to3
provide for the delay in filing an answer in incidental actions; to provide for the4
identification of testifying experts in discovery; to extend the delay for the state to5
respond to a request for the production of documents and things; to authorize the6
awarding of costs and attorney fees for delay in responding to discovery; and to7
provide for related matters.8
Be it enacted by the Legislature of Louisiana:9
Section 1. Code of Civil Procedure Articles 1035, 1425(C), 1462(B)(1), and 1469(4)10
are hereby amended and reenacted to read as follows: 11
Art. 1035. Answer12
The answer in an incidental action shall be filed within the delay allowed by13
Article 1001, or at any time prior to a judgment by default against the defendant in14
the incidental action, and shall be subject to all of the rules set forth in Articles 100115
and 1003 through 1006.16
Comment – 201417
The 2014 amendment to this Article conforms with the rules for answering18
incidental demands to those provided for the principal demand.19
* * *20 HLS 14RS-778 ORIGINAL
HB NO. 607
Page 2 of 5
CODING: Words in struck through type are deletions from existing law; words underscored
are additions.
Art. 1425. Experts; pretrial disclosures; scope of discovery1
* * *2
C. The If the court orders the disclosures of Paragraph B of this Article, they3
shall be made at the times and in the sequence directed by the court. In the absence4
of other directions from the court or stipulation by the parties, the disclosures5
required ordered pursuant to Paragraph B of this Article shall be made at least ninety6
days before the trial date or, if the evidence is intended solely to contradict or rebut7
evidence on the same subject matter identified by another party under Paragraph B8
of this Article, within thirty days after the disclosure made by the other party. The9
parties shall supplement these disclosures when required by Article 1428.10
* * *11
Comments - 201412
(a) Contrary to Quillian v. The Dixie Bonded Warehouse, 105 So.3d 71 (La.13
App. 2d Cir. 8/29/12), Article 1425 does not require a party, absent a discovery14
request or an order requiring an expert report, to identify testifying experts. 15
(b) The identification of testifying expert witnesses is obtained by16
interrogatories, depositions, requirements in a scheduling order entered pursuant to17
Article 1551(A)(5) or (8), or by court order under Paragraph B. The preparation and18
submission of reports of testifying experts is required only if ordered by the court19
pursuant to Paragraph (B). If expert reports are ordered, the court should set20
production deadlines in the order; however, if there is no deadline set in the order,21
then the sequence provided in Paragraph (C) applies by default.22
* * *23
Art. 1462. Production of documents and things; entry upon land; procedure24
* * *25
B.(1) The party upon whom the request is served shall serve a written26
response within fifteen days after service of the request, except that a defendant may27
serve a response within thirty days after service of the petition upon that defendant,28
and except that the state and its political subdivisions may serve a response within29
thirty days after service of the request. The court may allow a shorter or longer time.30
With respect to each item or category, the response shall state that inspection and31
related activities will be permitted as requested, unless the request is objected to, in32
which event the reasons for objection shall be stated. If objection is made to part of33 HLS 14RS-778 ORIGINAL
HB NO. 607
Page 3 of 5
CODING: Words in struck through type are deletions from existing law; words underscored
are additions.
an item or category, the part shall be specified. The written answer or reasons for1
objection to each request for production of documents shall immediately follow a2
restatement of the request for production of documents to which the answer or3
objection is responding. The party submitting the request may move for an order4
under Article 1469 with respect to any objection to or other failure to respond to the5
request, or any part thereof, or any failure to permit inspection as requested. If6
objection is made to the requested form or forms for producing information,7
including electronically stored information, or if no form was specified in the8
request, the responding party shall state in its response the form or forms it intends9
to use.10
* * *11
Comment - 201412
The 2014 amendment to Paragraph B extends the period for the state and its13
political subdivisions to respond to a request from fifteen days to thirty days so as14
to coincide with the period provided in Article 1458 for responses to interrogatories.15
* * *16
Art. 1469. Motion for order compelling discovery17
A party, upon reasonable notice to other parties and all persons affected18
thereby, may apply for an order compelling discovery as follows:19
* * *20
(4) If the motion is granted compelling the discovery, or if the court finds21
that there was unreasonable delay in providing a response to the discovery, the court22
shall, after opportunity for hearing, require the party or deponent whose conduct23
necessitated the motion or the party or attorney advising such conduct or both of24
them to pay to the moving party the reasonable expenses incurred in obtaining the25
order filing the motion and appearing in court, including attorney's fees, unless the26
court finds that the opposition to the motion or delay in providing a response to the27
discovery was substantially justified or that other circumstances make an award of28
expenses unjust.29 HLS 14RS-778 ORIGINAL
HB NO. 607
Page 4 of 5
CODING: Words in struck through type are deletions from existing law; words underscored
are additions.
If the motion is denied, the court shall, after opportunity for hearing, require1
the moving party or the attorney advising the motion or both of them to pay to the2
party or deponent who opposed the motion the reasonable expenses incurred in3
opposing the motion, including attorney's fees, unless the court finds that the making4
of the motion was substantially justified or that other circumstances make an award5
of expenses unjust.6
If the motion is granted in part and denied in part, the court may apportion7
the reasonable expenses incurred in relation to the motion among the parties and8
persons in a just manner.9
* * *10
Comment - 201411
The 2014 amendment to Paragraph (4) of this Article authorizes the trial12
court to award costs and attorney's fees to a party moving to compel discovery when13
the other party's delay in responding to the discovery necessitated the motion.14
* * *15
DIGEST
The digest printed below was prepared by House Legislative Services. It constitutes no part
of the legislative instrument. The keyword, one-liner, abstract, and digest do not constitute
part of the law or proof or indicia of legislative intent. [R.S. 1:13(B) and 24:177(E)]
Abramson HB No. 607
Abstract: Provides for continuous revision of the Code of Civil Procedure including
requiring the deadline for answering incidental demands the same as provided for the
incidental demand, clarifying that a party is under no obligation to identify a
testifying expert absent a discovery request or order for an expert report, extending
the time period within which the state has to respond to a request for production of
documents, and authorizing the court to award costs and attorney's fees when a party
unreasonably delays the response to discovery.
Present law (C.C.P. Art.1035) provides for answer in incidental demands.
Proposed law makes the deadline for answering incidental demands the same as provided
for principal demands.
Present law (C.C.P. Art.1425) provides for identifying testifying experts.
Proposed law specifies that a party is under no obligation to identify a testifying expert
absent a discovery request or order for an expert report.
Present law (C.C.P. Art.1462) provides for discovery-production of documents and things. HLS 14RS-778 ORIGINAL
HB NO. 607
Page 5 of 5
CODING: Words in struck through type are deletions from existing law; words underscored
are additions.
Proposed law extends the period for the state and its political subdivisions to respond to a
request for production of documents and things from 15 to 30 days.
Present law (C.C.P. Art.1469) provides for the motion for an order compelling discovery.
Proposed law authorizes the court to award costs and attorney's fees when a party
unreasonably delays the response to discovery.
(Amends C.C.P. Arts. 1035, 1425(C), 1462(B)(1), and 1469(4))