Request for admissions

Basic structure

Requests for admission are a list of questions which are similar in some respects to interrogatories, but different in form and purpose. Each "question" is in the form of a declarative statement which the answering party must then either admit, deny, or state in detail why they can neither admit nor deny the truthfulness of the statement (e.g. for lack of knowledge, etc.). This effectively puts the admissions in the form of true-false questions. For example, in a case involving an automobile accident, the plaintiff might include in their request a statement such as "Defendant Smith was driving a blue Dodge Caravan on the morning of the accident".

Under Rule 36(a)(5) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the answering party may also object to the request, and state the reason for their objection, so long as the objection is not solely because the request would present a genuine issue of fact for trial.

Rule 36(a)(1) limits the types of requests to be limited to (A) facts, the application of law to fact, or opinions about either; and (B) the genuineness of any described documents. However, the rule places no limits on the number of requests which may be made of either litigant. State court rules, however, may be stricter than this.

Notably, under Rule 36(a)(3), requests for admission are automatically deemed admitted in U.S. federal courts if the opponent fails to timely respond or object. The opponent bears the burden of moving for relief from its failure to respond and providing a legitimate excuse for why it did not respond earlier.

Some U.S. states have reversed the burden as set forth in the federal rules, such that the party propounding the RFAs must follow up with a motion to have RFAs deemed admitted.