Requests for Admission in California PI Cases.

Overview

Requests for admission can lock in key facts or, if ignored, result in deemed admissions that devastate the opposing side's case.

CCP 2033: Statutory Framework

RFAs are governed by CCP sections 2033.010 through 2033.420. The statute authorizes requests to admit the truth of specified matters of fact, the application of law to fact, or the genuineness of specified documents.

Key Statutory Provisions

Provision	CCP Section	Summary
Right to request admissions	2033.010	Any party may request admissions from any other party
Number limit	2033.030	35 per party without declaration of necessity
Response time	2033.250	30 days from service
Deemed admissions	2033.280	Failure to respond = matters deemed admitted
Motion to withdraw admissions	2033.300	Court may permit withdrawal on showing of mistake/excusable neglect
Cost of proof sanctions	2033.420	Mandatory sanctions for unreasonable denial
Meet-and-confer	2033.290	Required before motion to compel further responses

The 35-RFA Limit

Each party may serve up to 35 requests for admission on any other party in a single set without a declaration of necessity. CCP 2033.030. To exceed 35:

• Attach a declaration of necessity under CCP 2033.050
• State that the additional RFAs are warranted by the complexity of the case or the number of issues
• The declaration must be specific -- boilerplate justifications are insufficient

Strategic Allocation of the 35 Limit

In a standard PI case, allocate your 35 RFAs strategically:

Category	Suggested Allocation	Purpose
Liability facts	8-12 RFAs	Establish negligence elements
Causation	5-8 RFAs	Link defendant's conduct to plaintiff's injuries
Damages	5-8 RFAs	Establish reasonableness of medical treatment and costs
Document authentication	5-8 RFAs	Authenticate key documents for trial
Affirmative defense facts	3-5 RFAs	Force defendant to commit to defense positions

Deemed Admissions: The Nuclear Option

How Deemed Admissions Work

Under CCP 2033.280, if a party fails to serve timely responses to RFAs, the matters are deemed admitted. This occurs automatically by operation of law -- no court order is required. The consequences are severe:

• Every matter in the RFA set is treated as conclusively established for all purposes in the action
• The requesting party may move for an order confirming the deemed admissions
• Deemed admissions can establish liability, causation, and damages -- potentially ending the case

Motion to Deem Matters Admitted

Under CCP 2033.280(b), when a party fails to respond to RFAs:

• The requesting party may move for an order deeming the matters admitted
• No meet-and-confer is required before filing
• The court shall make the order unless the responding party serves substantially compliant responses before the hearing
• The court shall impose monetary sanctions on the party or attorney who failed to respond

Motion to Withdraw or Amend Admissions

CCP 2033.300

A party may move to withdraw or amend admissions on a showing that:

1. Mistake, inadvertence, or excusable neglect caused the admission, AND
2. The party requesting admission will not be substantially prejudiced by the withdrawal

The Two-Part Test

Courts apply both prongs strictly:

Prong 1 -- Mistake/Excusable Neglect:

• Calendaring errors by attorney or staff
• Miscommunication about deadline responsibility
• Medical emergency or other extraordinary circumstances
• Simple negligence is generally sufficient if the delay is brief

Prong 2 -- No Substantial Prejudice:

• The requesting party has not changed position in reliance on the admissions
• The case is not on the eve of trial with no time for further discovery
• The requesting party can still conduct additional discovery on the admitted matters

Tactical Use of RFAs in PI Cases

Establishing Liability

Draft RFAs that target the elements of your cause of action:

Negligence (Motor Vehicle):

1. Admit that YOU owed a duty of care to Plaintiff when operating YOUR vehicle on [date].
2. Admit that YOU were operating YOUR vehicle at a speed greater than was safe for conditions at the time of the INCIDENT.
3. Admit that YOUR vehicle made contact with Plaintiff's vehicle during the INCIDENT.
4. Admit that YOU failed to maintain a safe following distance from Plaintiff's vehicle immediately prior to the INCIDENT.
5. Admit that YOUR conduct was a substantial factor in causing the INCIDENT.

Premises Liability:

1. Admit that YOU owned the SUBJECT PROPERTY on the date of the INCIDENT.
2. Admit that a dangerous condition existed on the SUBJECT PROPERTY at the time of the INCIDENT.
3. Admit that YOU had actual knowledge of the dangerous condition on the SUBJECT PROPERTY prior to the INCIDENT.
4. Admit that YOU failed to warn invitees of the dangerous condition on the SUBJECT PROPERTY.

Establishing Damages

RFAs on damages narrow the issues and set up cost-of-proof sanctions:

1. Admit that Plaintiff incurred medical expenses in the amount of $[amount] as a result of the INCIDENT.
2. Admit that the medical treatment Plaintiff received from [provider] was reasonable and necessary.
3. Admit that Plaintiff's medical treatment from [provider] was causally related to the INCIDENT.
4. Admit that Plaintiff lost earnings in the amount of $[amount] as a result of the INCIDENT.
5. Admit that DOCUMENT [medical bill] is a true and correct copy of the bill for medical services rendered to Plaintiff by [provider].

Authenticating Documents

RFAs are the most efficient way to authenticate documents for trial:

1. Admit that DOCUMENT [Exhibit A] is a genuine copy of the police report for the INCIDENT.
2. Admit that DOCUMENT [Exhibit B] is a genuine copy of the photograph taken at the scene of the INCIDENT.
3. Admit that DOCUMENT [Exhibit C] is a genuine copy of YOUR vehicle's maintenance records.
4. Admit that DOCUMENT [Exhibit D] is a genuine copy of YOUR insurance policy in effect on the date of the INCIDENT.

Cost of Proof Sanctions: CCP 2033.420

The Statute

CCP 2033.420 is one of the most powerful sanction provisions in the Discovery Act. If a party denies an RFA, and the requesting party later proves the truth of the matter at trial, the court shall order the denying party to pay the requesting party's reasonable expenses incurred in proving that matter, including attorney's fees, unless:

1. The denial was of reasonable merit at the time
2. The admission sought was of no substantial importance
3. The party had reasonable ground to believe they would prevail on the matter
4. Other good reason existed for the denial

Setting Up Cost-of-Proof Sanctions

To maximize your ability to recover cost-of-proof sanctions:

• [ ] Draft clear, unambiguous RFAs addressing specific, provable facts
• [ ] Serve RFAs early so the defendant has full opportunity to investigate
• [ ] Track every denial and the evidence that ultimately proves each denied fact
• [ ] Maintain detailed billing records for time spent proving denied matters
• [ ] File a motion for CCP 2033.420 sanctions after trial or summary judgment

Calculating Sanctions

Cost-of-proof sanctions include:

• Attorney's fees for proving the denied matter at trial
• Expert witness fees incurred to prove the denied matter
• Court reporter and deposition costs related to proving the denied matter
• Other reasonable expenses directly attributable to proving the matter

Case Law on Cost-of-Proof Sanctions

Key decisions interpreting CCP 2033.420:

• Brooks v. American Broadcasting Co. (1986) 179 Cal.App.3d 500: Cost-of-proof sanctions are mandatory unless the denying party establishes one of the statutory exceptions. The burden is on the denying party.
• Garcia v. Hyster Co. (1994) 28 Cal.App.4th 724: Sanctions may be awarded even if the denying party had some basis for the denial, if the basis was not reasonable.
• Stull v. Sparrow (2001) 92 Cal.App.4th 860: The party seeking sanctions must prove the truth of the matters denied and the reasonable expenses incurred.

Responding to Defense RFAs

Response Options

For each RFA, the responding party must choose one of the following responses:

Response	When Appropriate	Risk
Admit	The matter is true and cannot be reasonably disputed	Conclusive admission -- cannot be contradicted at trial
Deny	The matter is not true after reasonable investigation	Cost-of-proof sanctions if the matter is later proved true
Deny in part	Part of the RFA is true and part is not	Must specify which parts are admitted and denied
Lack of information	Cannot admit or deny after reasonable investigation	Must state that reasonable inquiry has been made
Object	The RFA is improper (privilege, relevance, etc.)	Must be made with specificity; boilerplate objections are insufficient

Common Defense RFAs and How to Respond

RFA: Admit that you were not wearing a seatbelt at the time of the INCIDENT.

• If true: Admit. Do not deny provable facts -- it destroys credibility.
• If uncertain: State that after reasonable investigation, sufficient information is not presently available.

RFA: Admit that you had consumed alcohol within 4 hours of the INCIDENT.

• If false: Deny with confidence.
• If true: Admit the fact; context can be provided in other discovery.

RFA: Admit that you had a preexisting injury to your [body part] prior to the INCIDENT.

• Important: Distinguish between "injury" and "complaint." Admit what is documented in medical records. Qualify if needed.

RFA: Admit that you posted photographs on social media showing you engaged in physical activity after the INCIDENT.

• Be very careful: Social media is discoverable. If posts exist, admit and explain in other discovery.

Genuineness of Documents

CCP 2033.010(b)

RFAs may request that a party admit the genuineness of any relevant document. A document admitted as genuine is authenticated for all purposes in the action -- eliminating the need for foundation testimony at trial.

Procedure

1. Attach a copy of the document to the RFA
2. Request admission that the document is genuine
3. If admitted, the document is self-authenticating at trial
4. If denied, you must authenticate the document through testimony -- and may seek cost-of-proof sanctions if the document is ultimately proven genuine

Documents to Authenticate via RFA

• [ ] Police/accident reports
• [ ] Medical records and billing statements
• [ ] Photographs and video of the scene
• [ ] Insurance policies and communications
• [ ] Maintenance and inspection records
• [ ] Employment records and pay stubs
• [ ] Business records of the defendant
• [ ] Expert reports
• [ ] Correspondence between the parties

Related Pages

• Discovery -- Comprehensive California discovery guide
• Interrogatories -- Form Interrogatory 15.1 combination strategy
• Depositions -- Using RFA responses for deposition preparation
• Summary Judgment -- Using admissions in opposition to summary judgment
• Trial Practice -- Using admissions at trial
• Spoliation of Evidence -- Document preservation and authentication

Cross-References

• Discovery
• Interrogatories
• Depositions
• Summary Judgment
• Evidence Rules
• Trial Practice

Common Questions

Sources & Legal Citations

1. California Code of Civil Procedure § 2033.010-2033.420. Requests for admission procedures.
2. California Code of Civil Procedure § 2033.280. Deemed admissions for failure to respond.
3. California Code of Civil Procedure § 2033.300. Withdrawal or amendment of admissions.
4. California Code of Civil Procedure § 2033.420. Cost-of-proof sanctions for unreasonable denials.
5. Wilcox v. Birtwhistle (1999) 21 Cal.4th 973. Standards for deemed admissions and relief.
6. St. Mary v. Superior Court (2014) 223 Cal.App.4th 762. Cost-of-proof sanctions requirements.