How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site.
    Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask Roger Your Own Question
Roger, Attorney
Category: Legal
Satisfied Customers: 31765
Experience:  BV Rated by Martindale-Hubbell; SuperLawyer rating by Thompson-Reuters
Type Your Legal Question Here...
Roger is online now
A new question is answered every 9 seconds

I have one quick question. Holiday and attorney is not available,

This answer was rated:

I have one quick question. Holiday and attorney is not available, and my homework is due. I am filling out a request for admissions and interrogatory response. I have one quick question about the term "request for admission" versus interrogatory. Request for Admission seems to denote a yes or no response. Is my assumption correct? I guess it is two quesitons. If request for admission is yes/no, then, is the interrogatory where I "expand" on the topic with the supporting documentation
A request for admission generally does require a yes or no response; but some elaboration may be necessary. Requests for admissions are usually asked to establish undisputed facts and to ask obvious questions.

An interrogatory is a question to find out information from the other side.


Request for Admission: Please admit that you ran the red light.

Interrogatory: Please describe your version of how the accident took place.

Customer: replied 7 years ago.

Well, yes/no will definitely reduce my workload this evening; however, I do not think it will help my EEOC case. How to I, for example, handle the following:


Admit that you did not implement X (X=Computer "Stuff", which caused a system outage)


Interrogatory: No opportunity to answer the fact that I did not implement X because I was on vacation, informed my manager of the risk and how to mitigate it, manager instructed "hostile" coworker to do this, coworker did not, and I was left holding the bag upon my return. Escalated to management, CIO ignored me and I had to go to HR for relief just to go home.


So, I can squeeze it into a hostile enviornment Interrogatory, but it appears that they are trying to point to this situation specifically. Do I answer it in the Request for Admission that is specifically asking about this question, answer no there, or squeeze it into an interrogatory?



On an admission, you can respond with a "Denied as stated.". Then, use the interrogatory to explain why you denies the admission.

Customer: replied 7 years ago.
Okay, I guess I have more than one simple questions. If you have time available, I will just add a bonus given our extended discussion. Do you have time?
I'll be glad to answer what I can.
Customer: replied 7 years ago.

Other than pixie dust, is there a way that I can consolidate hostile behavior, derogatory remarks, discriminator behavior, et. al into one commentary. That is to say, there are a number of overlapping issues that are hard to "pull apart". One example, I overheard my male team-members (I was in another's cube and they did not know I was there - yep, got an earful) calling me a "backstabbing bitch" (gender discrimination), talking about ways to get rid of me (hostile work environment - retaliation) , etc. There are a number of instances that are similar in nature. Is there a way that I can trim down multiple questions requiring multiple responses to one referring reference of exhibits?

You can answer the first chronological question in full. Any sugsequent question can be answered with "See response to Interrogatory No. "X". You don't have to re-state the same thing over and over. Just make a reference to it as stated above.
Customer: replied 7 years ago.

In your response to use Denied as Stated for the request for Admission and add to the interrogatory. If there is not an interrogatory that specifically addresses not installing X, which interoggatory do I add it to or


Denied as Stated


. . . and here is why


Exhibits ????

You can elaborate after you respond "denied as stated" with an explaination and also reference exhibits. There is nothing wrong with doing that.
Roger and 8 other Legal Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 7 years ago.

Sorry for the crude example, but are you proposing the following:


  1. Interrogatory X (One that has a wide breathe of possibility)

The following Exhibits indicate inappropriate behavior, be it a hostile work environment, retailiation, or discrimination based on gender

  • Exhibit A
  • Exhibit B
  • Exhibit C
  • etc.


Interrogatory 1 address hotile work environment

See response to Interogatory X


interrogatory 2 address discrimination based on gender

See response to Interogatory X


Interrogatory 3 address retaliation

See response to Interogatory X


Sorry, not looking for shortcuts. I tend to be a bit prolific, so I have spend the last two weeks just organizing over 1,500 documents. I have a deadline of 6/7, but my attorney needed this yesterday.


Open to ideas, of course




There's nothing wrong with doing it this way. You should specify certain exhibits to Interrogatory 1. that pertain to the subsequent interrogatory.
Customer: replied 7 years ago.

Sorry, confused (my normal state these days, while trying to manage a full-time, hostile job and a Civil Rights/EEOC filing - ah, the strategy to kill me with paperwork). Let me repeat what I think I heard: I can do as was proposed; however, I need to make sure that when I reference Interrogatory X, interrogatory X has exhibits that represent another interrogatory's requirements, even though they would have to "sort" through various exhibits?

What I was trying to say is that you should respond as follows:


Interrogatory 1 address hotile work environment

See response to Interogatory X, Exhibit "A".


You need to be specific about which exhibits are responsive to the question.

Customer: replied 7 years ago.

I was afraid of that, as different types if issues are "intermingled" within each exhibit. This was apparent in the example I gave about overhearing a conversation in the office next to where I was. I suspect the solution is to put together all the "inappropriate" exhibits and have my attorney sort through them. I am sure as an attorney that you appreciate a well organized client, especially when what I do is so technical that my attorney is always razzing me about not know what the heck I'm talking about at times :-)


Given me another two weeks and I could have this all whipped into shape. Well, there is that full-time job I still have to do in between, so I might need three weeks. Oh well, I'll be working through the night to do what I can.


I appreciate your sage legal advice and stating the obvious - there are no short cuts to a complex case that required hiring a top labor attorney. I'll let you off the hook and get back to the work at hand. Yep, face the inevitable.


Thank You!

Specifics are required. Someone's going to have to do it. If you put in the work, you won't have to pay your attorney to do it.
Customer: replied 7 years ago.

At $350 he is worth every penny. I just don't have a lot of pennys, nor did I want to call him and admit that I was lost. I understand that to do his job effectively, I have to do mine just as well. Yes, it does not make sense for him to sift through my paperwork. He is estatic that I am as prolific as I am - just a habit and preferred method of communications. In this situation, my minor in English is definitely more important than my major in computers. Laughingtitle="Laughing"/>


Thanks for being a good listener and providing some great advise. I suspect that I just needed someone to get me focused and pointed in the right direction.

"All that is necessary for the triump of evil is that good " (Edmund Burke). I'm back on track.