Section 6-336 - [Effective 1/1/2025] Requests for admission(a) Scope and Procedure. (1) Scope. A party may serve on any other party a written request to admit, for purposes of the pending action only, the truth of any matters within the scope of Rule 26(b) relating to: (A) facts, the application of law to fact, or opinions about either; and(B) the genuineness of any described documents.(2) Form; Copy of a Document. Each matter must be separately stated. A request to admit the genuineness of a document must be accompanied by a copy of the document unless it is, or has been, otherwise furnished or made available for inspection and copying.(3) When Served; Editable Format. Requests may be served on the plaintiff after commencement of the action and on any other party with or after service of the summons on that party. Upon demand, the party served with the requests must be given an electronic copy of the requests in a readily editable format.(4) Time to Respond; Effect of Not Responding. A matter is admitted unless the party to whom the request is directed serves on the requesting party a written answer or objection addressed to the matter and signed by the party or its attorney: (A) within 30 days after being served with the request;(B) if the party is a defending party within 45 days after being served with the summons or 30 days after being served with the request, whichever is longer; or(C) the time stipulated to under Rule 29 or ordered by the court.(5) Answer. If a matter is not admitted, the answer must specifically deny it or state in detail why the answering party cannot truthfully admit or deny it. A denial must fairly respond to the substance of the matter; and when good faith requires that a party qualify an answer or deny only a part of the matter, the answer must specify the part admitted and qualify or deny the rest. The answering party may assert lack of knowledge or information as a reason for failing to admit or deny only if the party states that it has made reasonable inquiry and that the information it knows or can readily obtain is insufficient to enable it to admit or deny.(6) The grounds for objecting to a request must be stated. A party must not object solely on the ground that the request presents a genuine issue for trial.(7) Form of Answer or Objection. The answering or objecting party must reproduce each request and then state the party's answer or objection to the request.(8) Motion Regarding the Sufficiency of an Answer or Objection. The requesting party may move to determine the sufficiency of an answer or objection. Unless the court finds an objection justified, it must order that an answer be served. On finding that an answer does not comply with this rule, the court may order either that the matter is admitted or that an amended answer be served. The court may defer its final decision until a pretrial conference or a specified time before trial. Rule 37(a)(5) applies to an award of expenses.(b) Effect of Admission; Withdrawing or Amending It. A matter admitted under this rule is conclusively established unless the court, on motion, permits the admission to be withdrawn or amended. The court may permit withdrawal or amendment if it promotes the presentation of the merits of the action and if the court is not persuaded that it would prejudice the requesting party in maintaining or defending the action on the merits. An admission under this rule is not an admission for any other purpose and cannot be used against the party in any other proceeding.Amended November 13, 2024, effective 1/1/2025.COMMENTS TO § 6-336
[1] Much of the rule is modeled on Federal Rule 36. There are minor differences, however, including when requests may be served and how the responding party must structure its responses.
[2] Unlike the rules governing interrogatories and document production requests, § 6-336 does not require the responding party to state its objections with specificity. The specificity requirement is designed to help parties to resolve discovery disputes. Requests for admission, however, are a means of establishing facts rather than discovering them. Therefore, the rationale for the specificity requirement does not apply to them.