Cable & Computer Technology, Inc. v. Lockheed Saunders, Inc.

Brief Fact Summary.

Plaintiff sued Defendant for fraud, breach of contract, and other claims.  Defendant sought an order from the court compelling Plaintiff to answer certain interrogatories. Plaintiff objected to the interrogatories on the ground that they were “contention interrogatories.”

Synopsis of Rule of Law.

An interrogatory is not objectionable because it calls for an opinion or a contention related to a fact or the application of law to a fact.

Facts.

Defendant sought an order from the court compelling Plaintiff to answer certain interrogatories in an action Plaintiff brought against it  for fraud, breach of contract, and other claims related to certain radar simulator contracts.  Plaintiff objected to the interrogatories on the ground that they were “contention interrogatories.”

Issue.

Was Plaintiff obligated to respond to the “contention interrogatories“?

Held.

Yes. Plaintiff was obligated to respond to the “contention interrogatories“?

Discussion.

With respect to objections to contention interrogatories, the burden is on the party opposing discovery. For concerns regarding an answer effectively limiting proof at trial, the trial court may permit the subsequent withdrawal or amendment of an answer to an interrogatory.