This article is provided for educational and informational purposes only. It does not constitute legal, financial, or tax advice, and no attorney-client relationship is formed by reading it. Laws, regulations, official guidance, and related information vary by jurisdiction, change frequently, and may have changed or become outdated since the publication date. Always verify current information with authoritative sources and consult a qualified professional about your specific circumstances. The author and publisher assume no liability for actions taken based on this information.
Key Facts
- Federal level: A motion to compel asks a court to order a required disclosure or response to discovery.
- Federal level: Rule 37 requires the motion to certify a good-faith conference or attempted conference aimed at resolving the dispute without court action.
- Federal level: An evasive or incomplete disclosure, answer, or response is treated as a failure for purposes of a Rule 37(a) motion.
- Federal level: Motions concerning a party go to the court where the action is pending, while motions concerning a nonparty generally go to the court where discovery is or will be taken.
- Federal level: Rule 37 contains expense-shifting rules whether a motion is granted, denied, or split, subject to stated exceptions and an opportunity to be heard.
A motion to compel is the federal civil procedure used when required disclosures or discovery responses have not been provided adequately. It asks the court to resolve a defined discovery dispute and order compliance. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37 supplies the central framework, while the discovery request, protective-order rules, local rules, and scheduling orders shape the particular dispute.
What can a motion to compel address?
Rule 37(a) authorizes a motion to compel a disclosure required by Rule 26(a). It also covers a deponent’s failure to answer, an organization’s failure to designate a witness, a party’s failure to answer an interrogatory, and a failure to produce documents or permit inspection under Rule 34.
The rule reaches more than complete silence. An evasive or incomplete disclosure, answer, or response is treated as a failure to disclose, answer, or respond. The disputed request still must fit the governing discovery rules, so a motion can turn on relevance, proportionality, privilege, burden, the clarity of the request, or the sufficiency of an objection.
The good-faith conference comes first
A Rule 37(a) motion must certify that the movant conferred or attempted in good faith to confer with the person or party that failed to provide discovery. The purpose is to seek resolution without court action.
This certification is substantive, not decorative. Rule 37’s expense provisions expressly protect against an award to a successful movant that filed before making the required good-faith effort. A court may also enforce its local meet-and-confer procedures independently.
Which court decides the motion?
A motion seeking an order against a party must be made in the court where the action is pending. A motion seeking an order against a nonparty must be made in the court where the discovery is or will be taken. Subpoena disputes also implicate Rule 45, including its place-of-compliance provisions and procedures for protecting a person subject to a subpoena.
For an oral deposition, the examining party may complete or adjourn the examination before seeking an order. Rule 30 separately limits when a deponent may be instructed not to answer and permits a motion to terminate or limit an examination conducted in bad faith or in an unreasonably oppressive manner.
Common discovery requests behind these motions
Rule 33 governs interrogatories to parties and generally requires each interrogatory to be answered separately and fully under oath unless a specific objection is stated. Rule 34 governs requests for documents, electronically stored information, tangible things, and entry for inspection, and requires a written response to each item or category.
Requests for admission under Rule 36 operate differently. Rule 36 provides procedures for testing the sufficiency of an answer or objection, while Rule 37(c)(2) addresses expenses when a party fails to admit a matter that the requesting party later proves, subject to listed exceptions. The remedy therefore depends on the discovery device and the kind of deficiency.
Related discovery tools include interrogatories, document requests, and requests for admission. Their distinct response rules determine what the motion must identify and what relief the court can evaluate.
Expenses when the court rules
If a motion is granted, or the requested discovery arrives only after filing, Rule 37 generally requires the court—after an opportunity to be heard—to award the movant reasonable motion expenses, including attorney’s fees. Payment must not be ordered if the motion preceded a good-faith effort, the opposing position was substantially justified, or other circumstances make an award unjust.
If the motion is denied, the rule generally shifts reasonable opposition expenses to the movant after an opportunity to be heard, unless the motion was substantially justified or an award would be unjust. If the motion is granted in part and denied in part, the court may apportion reasonable expenses and may enter an authorized protective order.
A motion to compel is different from sanctions for violating an order
Rule 37(a) concerns obtaining an order that compels discovery. Rule 37(b) addresses failure to obey an existing discovery order and authorizes further just orders, potentially including designated facts, evidence restrictions, striking pleadings, a stay, dismissal, default judgment, or contempt in specified circumstances.
Those severe outcomes are not automatic consequences of filing a motion to compel. The court must apply the relevant rule, make any required findings, provide required process, and select relief appropriate to the violation. Rule 37 also contains separate provisions for complete failures to attend a deposition or respond to interrogatories or inspection requests, failures to disclose, failures to admit, and loss of electronically stored information.
What a court evaluates
A motion ordinarily identifies the exact request, response or objection, conference history, governing discovery rule, and requested order. The opposing position may rely on privilege, proportionality, burden, ambiguity, prior production, a protective order, or another recognized limit. The court compares the request and response against federal rules, its scheduling and discovery orders, and applicable local procedures.
A motion to compel is therefore not a general complaint that cooperation has been poor. It presents specific unresolved discovery issues for a ruling, with potential expense consequences for positions that lack substantial justification.
Sources
- Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37 — Discovery Motions and Sanctions
- Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 — Discovery Scope and Protective Orders
- Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30 — Oral Depositions
- Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 33 — Interrogatories
- Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 34 — Production and Inspection
- Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 36 — Requests for Admission
- Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 — Subpoenas
- United States Courts — Current Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
