Motion to Deem Facts Admitted in South Carolina

Understanding the Purpose and Significance of a Motion to Deem Facts Admitted

“[T]he rules of discovery were designed to promote the full examination of all relevant facts and issues and to discourage litigants from surprising one another through the introduction of unexpected testimony." (See Kramer v. Kramer (1996) 323 S.C. 212, 217, 473 S.E.2d 846, 848; Halsema v. Earley, No. 2023-UP-195, at *7 (S.C. Ct. App. May 18, 2023).)

"The entire thrust of the discovery rules involves full and fair disclosure, to prevent a trial from becoming a guessing game or one of surprise for either party." (See Glenn v. 3M Co., No. 5975, at *43 (S.C. Ct. App. Apr. 5, 2023); Samples v. Mitchell (1997) 329 S.C. 105, 113, 495 S.E.2d 213, 217; State Highway Dep't v. Booker (1973) 260 S.C. 245, 252, 195 S.E.2d 615, 619.)

"Essentially, the rights of discovery provided by the rules give the trial lawyer the means to prepare for trial, and when these rights are not accorded, prejudice must be presumed." (See id.)

"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, including the existence, description, nature, custody, condition and location of any books, documents, or other tangible things and the identity and location of persons having knowledge of any discoverable matter." (See Howe v. Air & Liquid Sys. Corp., No. 2021-UP-422, at *3 (S.C. Ct. App. Dec. 1, 2021); S.C. R. Civ. P. 26.).)

“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.” (See Ex parte Smith (2014) 756 S.E.2d 386, n.1.)

“South Carolina has long had the discovery rule that failure to respond to requests for admissions renders any matter listed in the request conclusively admitted for trial.The rule is intended to expedite the trial and to relieve the parties of the cost of proving facts that will not be disputed at trial, the truth of which is known to the parties or can be ascertained by reasonable inquiry.” (See Scott v. Greenville Housing (2003) 353 S.C. 639, 645.)

Requests for Admission

Rule 36 of the South Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure governs requests for admissions.

“A party may serve upon any other party a written request for the admission, for purposes of the pending action only, of the truth of any matters within the scope of Rule 26(b) set forth in the request that relate to statements or opinions of fact or of the application of law to fact, including the genuineness of any documents described in the request.” (See S.C. R. Civ. P. 36(a).)

“Copies of documents shall be served with the request unless they have been or are otherwise furnished or made available for inspection and copying. The request may, without leave of court, be served upon the plaintiff after commencement of the action and upon any other party with or after service of the summons and complaint upon that party.” (See id.)

“Each matter of which an admission is requested shall be separately set forth. The matter is admitted unless, within 30 days after service of the request, or within such shorter or longer time as the court may allow or as stipulated in writing by the parties pursuant to Rules 29 and 6(b), the party to whom the request is directed serves upon the party requesting the admission a written answer or objection addressed to the matter, signed by the party or by his attorney, but, unless the court shortens the time, a defendant shall not be required to serve answers or objections before the expiration of 45 days after service of the summons and complaint upon him. If objection is made, the reasons therefor shall be stated.” (See id.)

“The answer shall specifically deny the matter or set forth in detail the reasons why the answering party cannot truthfully admit or deny the matter. A denial shall fairly meet the substance of the requested admission, and when good faith requires that a party qualify his answer or deny only a part of the matter of which an admission is requested, he shall specify so much of it as is true and qualify or deny the remainder.” (See id.)

“An answering party may not give lack of information or knowledge as a reason for failure to admit or deny unless he states that he has made reasonable inquiry and that the information known or readily obtainable by him is insufficient to enable him to admit or deny. A party who considers that a matter of which an admission has been requested presents a genuine issue for trial may not, on that ground alone, object to the request; he may, subject to the provisions of Rule 37(c), deny the matter or set forth reasons why he cannot admit or deny it.” (See id.)

“The party who has requested the admissions may move to determine the sufficiency of the answers or objections. Unless the court determines that an objection is justified, it shall order that an answer be served.” (See id.)

“If the court determines that an answer does not comply with the requirements of this rule, it may order either that the matter is admitted or that an amended answer be served. The court may, in lieu of these orders, determine that final disposition of the request be made at a pre-trial conference or at a designated time prior to trial. The provisions of Rule 37(a)(4) apply to the award of expenses incurred in relation to the motion.” (See id.)

“Any matter admitted under this rule is conclusively established unless the court on motion permits withdrawal or amendment of the admission. Subject to the provisions of Rule 16 governing amendment of a pre-trial order, the court may permit withdrawal or amendment when the presentation of the merits of the action will be subserved thereby and the party who obtained the admissions fails to satisfy the court that withdrawal or amendment will prejudice him in maintaining his action or defense on the merits. Any admission made by a party under this rule is for the purpose of the pending action only and is not an admission by him for any other purpose.” (See S.C. R. Civ. P. 36(b).)

“A party may serve on any other party more than one set of requests to admit, but the total number of all requests to one party shall not exceed twenty requests, including subparts, except by leave of court upon good cause shown. Requests to admit the genuineness of documents or tangible things are not limited to any number of documents or things.” (See S.C. R. Civ. P. 36(c).)

Procedural Steps Involved in Filing a Motion to Deem Facts Admitted

“Under Rule 36(a), SCRCP, all matters contained in a Request for Admission are admitted unless the party serves answers or objects within a certain time.” (See Scott v. Greenville Housing (2003) 353 S.C. 639, 647.)

“In reviewing the tenets of Rule 36(a), our courts have repeatedly found that failure to respond to requests for admissions deems matters contained therein admitted for trial, regardless of whether the admission concerns a matter responded to in a party's pleadings.” (See id.)

“The efficacy of these admissions is akin to the doctrine of judicial estoppel: an admission precludes the admitting party from arguing facts at trial contrary to its responses to a request to admit, absent an amendment to or revocation of the admission as allowed under the rules.” (See id; Rule 36(b), SCRCP.)

“Admissions under Rule 36 are treated as admissions in pleadings.” (See id; James F. Flanagan, South Carolina Civil Procedure 304 (1996) [Admissions are similar to pleadings].)

Discretion of the Court in Deciding a Motion to Deem Facts Admitted

“This court has affirmed the seriousness of the ramifications for a failure to respond to requests in a timely matter.” (See Nexstar Media Grp. v. Davis Roofing Grp. (2020) 431 S.C. 593, 602-03; Scott v. Greenville Housing (2003) 353 S.C. 639, 645.)

“This court [has] stated South Carolina has long had the discovery rule that failure to respond to requests for admissions renders any matter listed in the request conclusively admitted for trial." (See id.)

Stated differently, "our courts have repeatedly found that failure to respond to requests for admissions deems matters contained therein admitted for trial, regardless of whether the admission concerns a matter responded to in a party's pleadings." (See id.)

“It is well-settled that the scope and conduct of discovery are within the sound discretion of the trial court.” (See Palmetto Alliance v. S.C. Public Serv. Comm (1984) 282 S.C. 430, 436.)

“A trial court's ruling on a discovery matter will not be disturbed on appeal except where there is an abuse of discretion.” (See Owens v. Stirling (2023) 438 S.C. 352, 358; Dunn v. Dunn (1989) 298 S.C. 499, 502, 381 S.E.2d 734, 735.)

"The burden is upon the party appealing from the order to demonstrate the trial court abused its discretion." (See id.) 

"An ‘abuse of discretion’ may be found by this Court where the appellant shows that the conclusion reached by the lower court was without reasonable factual support, resulted in prejudice to the right of appellant, and, therefore, amounted to an error of law." (See id.)

“However, South Carolina jurisprudence also establishes a trial court may use its discretion in finding requests to admit are not deemed admitted when the circumstances indicate otherwise.” (See id.)

Legal Precedents and Case Law on a Motion to Deem Facts Admitted

It is well settled that “the federal rule on requests for admissions is substantively similar to our rule. According to Rule 36(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, matters for which an admission is sought shall be deemed admitted unless ‘the party to whom the request is directed serves upon the party requesting the admission a written answer or objection addressed to the matter…’" (See Scott v. Greenville Housing (2003) 353 S.C. 639, 649; Rule 36(a), FRCP.)

As such, it is also well settled that “the purpose of the rule is to save time and to limit the issues in the case.” (See id.)