 |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 Discovery Tools In an effort to save time, many states have a procedure, sometimes known as a Request for Admission, whereby, if formally asked about some fact(s), a party can admit the truth of it. The purpose is to save time, although to an outsider, it often looks like a complete waste of time. For example, a person can be asked to admit the car they were driving was navy blue. And if admitted, this fact does not have to be proved at trial, if it is relevant. For example, assume a car in the accident was navy blue and one was black, and both hit the Plaintiff’s car and caused injury. But unknown to the Plaintiff, the navy blue car ran a red light and hit the black car, which hit the Plaintiff’s car also. At trial, if the Defendant driving the black car did not force the technical issue of which car ran the red light, that Defendant might seriously undermine her case, and confusion might arise about which car ran the red light and thus ultimately caused the accident. Once could expect at trial, years after the accident, that memories might fade a bit and navy blue and black might become confused, either intentionally or unintentionally. This illustrates the painstaking exactness required in the legal system, but shows how if it was not exact, one party could be forced to pay for damages he/she did not cause. There are other tools at discovery that are beyond the need for discussion here, since, regardless of the discovery tool, the same concerns and delays and expenses will likely result.
|
