Motion for Order Deeming Facts Admitted and Genuineness of Documents in Texas

What Is a Motion for Order Deeming Facts Admitted and Genuineness of Documents?

Background

Tex. R. Civ. P. 198.1 states in relevant part: "A party may serve on another party ... written requests that the other party admit the truth of any matter within the scope of discovery, including statements of opinion or of fact or of the application of law to fact, or the genuineness of any documents served with the request or otherwise made available for inspection and copying." (Id.)

“Under Rule 198, a request for admission is deemed admitted—without the necessity of a court order—if a response is not timely served. (Medina v. Zuniga (2019) No. 17-0498, at *7 citing Tex. R. Civ. P. 198.2(c).) “When a deemed admission arises from a merits-preclusive request—one in which the requestor essentially seeks an admission of liability—the deemed admission can amount to a death-penalty sanction.” (Id.)

How to Structure the Motion

Pursuant to Rule 215.4(b), “if a party fails to admit the genuineness of any document or the truth of any matter as requested under Rule 198 and if the party requesting the admissions thereafter proves the genuineness of the document or the truth of the matter, he may apply to the court for an order requiring the other party to pay him the reasonable expenses incurred in making that proof, including reasonable attorney’s fees.”

The court shall make the order unless it finds that:

the request was held objectionable pursuant to Rule 193, or
the admission sought was of no substantial importance, or
the party failing to admit had a reasonable ground to believe that he might prevail on the matter, or
there was other good reason for the failure to admit.

(Meyer v. Cathey (2005) 167 S.W.3d 327, 333.)

The Court’s Decision

"Requests for admission are a tool, not a trapdoor." (Medina v. Zuniga (2019) No. 17-0498, at *6 citing U.S. Fid. & Guar. Co. v. Goudeau (2008) 272 S.W.3d 603, 610.) “They primarily serve "to simplify trials by eliminating matters about which there is no real controversy, but which may be difficult or expensive to prove.” (Id., Medina citing Sanders v. Harder (1950) 227 S.W.2d 206, 208.)

“When used ‘as intended,’ requests for admissions are useful in ‘addressing uncontroverted matters or evidentiary ones like the authenticity or admissibility of documents.’” (Wheeler v. Green (2005) 157 S.W.3d 439, 443.) “But, as [the courts] have held for almost 70 years, they were ‘never intended to be used as a demand upon a plaintiff or defendant to admit that he had no cause of action or ground of defense.’” (Sanders, 227 S.W.2d at 208; see also Marino v. King (2011) 355 S.W.3d 629, 632 stating, ‘[r]equests for admission were never intended for [the] purpose’ of asking the defendant to ‘admit to the validity of [the plaintiff's] claims and concede [the defendant's] defenses—matters [the plaintiff] knew to be in dispute.’)(Medina v. Zuniga (2019) No. 17-0498, at *6.)

Documents for Motion for Order Deeming Facts Admitted and Genuineness of Documents in Texas

Sort By

INTOUCH CREDIT UNION vs. ENGINE REBUILDERS, LLC, et al document preview

INTOUCH CREDIT UNIONS MOTION TO COMPEL - Motion - Compel

136 pages

FILED 4/12/2024 3:22 PM FELICIA PITRE DISTRICT CLERK …

Case Name INTOUCH CREDIT UNION vs. ENGINE REBUILDERS, LLC, et al