This Article examines how the federal courts have balanced the burdens of supplementation of discovery responses with its benefits. The author begins by examining the benefits and burdens of allowing supplemental discovery responses. The author examines the problems that arise under the current construction of F.R.C.P. Rule 26(e) and analyzes the statutory construction of the continuing discovery duty. The author then proposes several methods for more effective implementation of Rule 26(e) and argues that existing limitations on the federal requirements to amend certain discovery responses can be transcended by more aggressive use of existing mechanisms for enforcement, such as sanctions.
William R. Slomanson,
Supplementation of Discovery Responses in Federal Civil Procedure,
San Diego L. Rev.
Available at: https://digital.sandiego.edu/sdlr/vol17/iss2/3