When navigating the complex realm of Washington State family law, a legal tool you’ll likely encounter is known as “Requests for Admissions” (RFA’s). Notably, this tool can be instrumental in your case strategy but also comes with certain limitations and drawbacks that should be clearly understood.
Let’s start with a basic definition. Requests for Admissions are written statements sent from one party to another within a legal case. These statements can be about the facts of the case, the application of law to those facts, or the genuineness of documents. The receiving party must either “admit” or “deny” the statements, or state they lack enough information to do either. If they admit the statements, those facts are considered established for the rest of the case.
The use of RFAs can have several key advantages. First, they streamline the trial process by narrowing down the issues that must be litigated. By establishing certain facts as uncontested, you can avoid unnecessary argument and focus your efforts on other aspects of your case. This can save both time and financial resources, which are often at a premium during family law proceedings like divorce or child custody battles.
RFAs also have a strategic role in litigation. An effectively framed Request for Admission can corner an opposing party into making a tough decision: either admit a potentially damaging fact or face the possibility of later sanctions for wrongly denying it. Additionally, admissions can highlight contradictions in the opponent’s case, further strengthening your position.
Yet, it’s essential to note that RFAs are not without limitations and potential drawbacks. The chief among them is that the court generally restricts the number of RFAs one party can serve on another. This is to prevent an abusive inundation of requests, which could lead to undue burden and delay in the proceedings.
Furthermore, RFAs are not well-suited to explore complex issues, nuanced situations, or matters of opinion. They are designed to elicit straightforward answers to clear-cut factual or legal statements. Anything beyond that scope may result in an objection or be ignored as improper.
The truthfulness of responses to RFAs is another issue to consider. While parties are legally required to provide truthful responses under oath, it doesn’t entirely eliminate the chance of dishonesty or evasion. A skilled attorney can often detect such tactics, but it’s an unfortunate reality that not all parties will treat this process with the requisite honesty and integrity.
Another important limitation to remember is the penalty associated with improperly denied requests. Suppose a party denies a statement in the Request for Admission, which is later proven true at trial. In that case, the court may order that party to pay the costs and attorney’s fees incurred in making that proof, a consequence which can be financially burdensome.
When utilizing Requests for Admissions in Washington State family law, certain expectations come into play. While responding, it’s essential to be thorough and accurate. Any ambiguities or inaccuracies can potentially be exploited by the opposing party. Remember, an admission or denial is binding for the rest of the case and can significantly impact the case’s outcome.
Moreover, the responses must be timely. In Washington State, a party has 30 days from the service of the RFAs to respond. If they fail to do so within that time frame, the statements are deemed admitted by default. This could result in unwelcome consequences if the unresponded statements were unfavorable to the non-responsive party.
In conclusion, while Requests for Admissions are a powerful tool within the family law arena, they should be used judiciously and thoughtfully. A good understanding of their advantages, drawbacks, limitations, and expectations is key to effectively incorporate them into your case strategy. If used wisely, they can be instrumental in achieving your desired outcome in a family law dispute. Always remember that legal processes can be complex and confusing; therefore, consulting with a knowledgeable family law attorney is highly recommended to navigate these waters effectively.
The Hemmat Law Group (HLG) was founded in 1994 by Steven Amir Hemmat, a former DOJ Trial Attorney. We specialize in family law, supporting victims of the legal system.
Hemmat Law Group help good people in bad situations.
Our divorce lawyers provide expert legal advice for all aspects of divorce and legal separation, including child custody and property division. Contact us today.