Products Liability/Product Defect Plaintiff’s Interrogatories

Below are example interrogatories in a product liability lawsuit. This particular case involved a boiler accident.  The case was settled before trial, but these interrogatories were useful in helping to frame the claim in discovery and for settlement.

• Interrogatory Objections
• More sample interrogatories in other tort cases of the case
• Sample Pre-Trial Discovery (more sample discovery – depositions, requests for admission and production, etc).
• Sample Lawsuits (sample complaints in personal injury cases)

Product Liability Interrogatories

Bruce Wayne- Plaintiff

v

Doug Flemming- Defendant

CASE NO.: 05-C-00-1234

INTERROGATORIES TO THE DEFENDANT FROM THE PLAINTIFF

TO: Doug Flemming, Defendant

FROM: Bruce Wayne, Plaintiff

COMES NOW, the Plaintiff, Bruce Wayne, and propounds Interrogatories upon the Defendant, Doug Flemming, to fully, under oath, and in accordance with the Maryland Rule of Civil Procedure, Rule 2-421, subject to the instructions set forth below:

Instructions

1. These Interrogatories are continuing in character so as to require you to file supplementary answers if you obtain further or different information before trial.
2. (Unless otherwise stated, these Interrogatories refer to the time, place, and circumstances of the occurrence mentioned or complained of in the Complaint.
3. Where name and identity of a person is required, please state full name, home address and also business address, if known.
4. Where knowledge or information in possession of a party is requested, such request includes knowledge of the party’s agents, representatives, and unless privileged, his attorneys, and includes knowledge obtained from other persons or sources, even if such knowledge would be hearsay under applicable law, and even if the person receiving such information did not believe it, failed to confirm its validity, disregarded it, or had other knowledge that cast doubt on the information.
5. In the event that any document requested by these Interrogatories or to which you refer in your answers to these Interrogatories is withheld on the basis of a claim of privilege, set forth for each document withheld:
   1. A description of the factual and legal basis for the claim of privilege or objection in sufficient detail so as to permit the court to determine the validity of the claim or objection;
   2. A general description of the document including its size, length, form and subject matter;
   3. The name and address of the person(s) or entity involved in the creation of the document;
   4. The names and addresses of all persons who have had access to the document from the time of its creation to the present;
   5. The date on which the document was created; and
   6. The name and address of the present custodian of the document, and the names and addresses of all persons who have received copies, summaries, or explanations of the document.
6. In the event that any document to which you refer in your answers to these Interrogatories has been destroyed or discharged, or has otherwise left your possession, custody and control, set forth:
   1. A general description of the document including its size, length, form and subject matter;
   2. The name and address of the person(s) or entity involved in the creation of the document;
   3. The name and address of the person(s) who have had access to the document from the time of its creation to the present;
   4. The date on which the document was created;
   5. The name and address of the present custodian of the document, and the names and addresses of all persons who have received copies, summaries, or explanations of the document;
   6. The date, manner, and reason(s) for destruction or discard; and
   7. The names and addresses of persons authorizing and carrying out the destruction or discard of the document.

Definitions

1. The word “documents” is used in these Interrogatories in the broad and liberal sense and means written, typed, printed, recorded or graphic matter, however stored, produced or reproduced, of any kind and description and whether an original, master, duplicate or copy, including, but not limited to, papers, notes, accounts, books, advertisements, letters, memoranda, notes of conversations, contracts, agreements, drawings, telegrams, electronic mail, tape recordings, communications, including inter-office and intra-office memoranda, reports, studies, working papers, corporate records, minutes of meetings, notebooks, bank deposit slips, bank checks, cancelled checks, diaries, diary entries, appointment books, desk calendars, photographs, transcriptions or sound recordings of any type of personal or telephone conversations or negotiations, meetings or conferences or things similar to any of the foregoing, and to include any data, information or statistics contained within any data storage modules, tapes, discs, diskettes, or other memory device, or other information retrievable from any storage systems, including, but not limited to, computer-generated reports and printouts. The word “document” also includes data compilations from which information can be obtained and translated, if necessary, by the respondent through detection devices in a reasonably usable form. If any document has been modified by the addition of notations or otherwise, or has been prepared in multiple copies which are not identical, each modified copy or unidentical copy is a separate “document.”
2. The pronoun “you” refers to Defendant Mendoza; in both its individual capacity, and its successors, assigns, employees, agents, attorneys, and all other persons purporting to act on its behalf.
3. The word “identify” when used in reference to a document, requires you to state the date of creation, the author, the addressee, and the type of document (e.g., letter, memorandum, telegram or chart) referred to.
4. The word “identify” when used in reference to a person or entity requires you to state the full name, home address and telephone number, and business address and telephone number of the person or entity.
5. The word “identify” when used in reference to a communication requires you to state the time and date of the communication, the person(s) who was present or overheard the communication, and the nature and substance of the communication.
6. “Complaint” means the complaint filed in the above referenced action.
7. As used herein, the term “communications” shall mean sign language, any oral or written utterance, notation, or statement of any nature whatsoever, by and to whomsoever made, including, but not limited to, correspondence, conversations, dialogues, discussions, interviews, consultations, agreements and other understandings between or among two or more persons.
8. As used herein, the term “or” appearing in any Interrogatory should not be read so as to eliminate any part of the Interrogatory, but, whenever applicable, it shall have the same meaning as the term “and.” For example, an Interrogatory stating “support or refer” shall be read as “support and refer” if an Answer that does both can be made.
9. The term “Mendoza” means the corporation Mendoza, Ribas, Farinas & Associates and the business operated at 6265 Executive Boulevard, Rockville, Maryland, 20852 (in whatever business form, including corporation, close corporation, partnership, limited partnership, unincorporated association, proprietorship, S corporation, limited liability company, or any other form), including any real property owned, leased or otherwise occupied at that location, personal property of any kind at that location, and any other rights commonly attributed to the business known as “Mendoza,” including by way of example and not limitation, trade names, liquor licenses, copyright and trademark rights.
10. “Boiler system” refers to the boiler system you provided work for at Frederick Douglas High School.

Interrogatories

1. Identify all persons having knowledge or believed to have knowledge of the truth of the facts and averments set forth in the Complaint and Answer. With respect to each person identified, state concisely the facts that person is aware of, when and how the facts were obtained, and identify any document evidencing said person’s knowledge.
   Identify all comments, written or oral, you have had with these individuals.
2. State the name, address and occupation of each person whom you propose to call as an expert witness, including in your answer the subject matter on which each such expert is expected to testify, the substance of the findings and opinions to which such expert is expected to testify, and a summary of the grounds for each opinion of each such expert. Attach copies of the resume or curriculum vitae of each such person, as well as copies of all written reports made by any proposed expert. Identify all communications, written or oral, you have had with these individuals.
3. Identify, in conformity with the instructions above, each communication between you and any other party or any internal documents that referred or related to, directly or indirectly, the boiler system referenced in the Complaint. Please identify all documents that refer or relate to said communications, and identify all persons who have personal knowledge of said communications. If documents exist that are not in your possession, please identify the nature of the documents and their location.
4. If you contend that Plaintiff or any other party has made any admission against interest with respect to the allegations in this Complaint, state the substance of the admission, identify the communication concerning the admission, identify all documents that refer or relate to the admission, and identify all persons who have personal knowledge of the admission. Please provide the addresses and telephone numbers of all persons involved, including any individual from whom you have any written or signed or recorded statements, attaching to your answers a copy of any such statement in your control given by the Plaintiff, or any agent thereof.
5. Identify and attach any written document upon which a claim or defense you intend to use at trial is founded.
6. Did you factor into the work and the design decisions that you made on the project at Frederick Douglas High School such things as (1) whether dampers should be used, (2) the exact boilers that should be used, (3) the risks associated with drafts, (4) the already existing boiler system, and (5) whether new stacks were appropriate. If you contend that you did, what evidence will you rely upon at trial to support your contention? If you did not, and contend that it was not your duty, why do you so contend? Do you believe another person or entity had a duty to address the safety implications related to the design of the boiler system?
7. Identify all documents that you intend to introduce into evidence at trial, including documents the expert or experts that you intend to have testify on your behalf at trial have reviewed and/or relied upon in forming their opinions, or are otherwise relevant to this case. Include in your answer whether you have photographs, films, motion pictures or videotapes or other pictures relevant to the issues in this case showing the scene of this occurrence at the time of or after its happening, showing basically how it was then or now, or of the Plaintiff at any time after this occurrence, or the materials involved in this occurrence? State the date of each, the person taking the photographs and describe the content of each.
8. What is the your understanding or contention with respect to how the occurrence in question occurred, and how and why the Plaintiff sustained her injuries.
9. Do you have photographs, films, motion pictures or videotapes or other pictures relevant to the issues in this case showing the scene of this occurrence at the time of or after its happening, showing basically how it was then or now, or of the Plaintiff at any time after this occurrence, or the materials involved in this occurrence? If so, state the date of each, the person taking the photographs and describe the content of each.
10. What is your contention with regard to whether the boiler system was were being used at the time of the occurrence as it was designed to be used? If you contends that someone was misusing the system in any way, or that the accident was caused by the negligence of another person or party, please describe in detail how you contend it was being misused, or the negligence that brought about or contributed to the accident.
11. Does you contend that the Plaintiff or another else failed to heed or comply with any instruction or warning in connection with the occurrence in question or in any other way negligently caused the Plaintiff’s accident? Explain. If so, does Defendant contend that such failure, if any, on the part of the Plaintiff had any causal connection with the Plaintiff’s injuries?
12. What governmental, industry or safety organization standards, codes or regulations pertain to the use of the boiler in question and its design? State for each standard the date such standard promulgated, the sponsoring body, and whether the Defendant claims such standard was complied with in connection with the use of the product in question.
13. Please describe in detail all written material that would have accompanied the boiler system that you designed, built, implemented, or maintained.
14. State the nature and extent of all liability insurance coverage of every kind available directly or indirectly to you at the time of the happening of this occurrence and include the name of each insurance company and the applicable limits of liability insurance in effect for each person and/or occurrence;
    1. If there was more than one policy of insurance applicable in this instance, identify each insurance company as indicated above and state which liability insurance company is the primary insurance carrier and identify any/and all secondary, reserve and/or umbrella liability insurance carriers, if any;
    2. Attach a copy of the policy and coverage sheet for each such liability insurance company setting forth all the available liability limits of coverage.
15. What instructions or recommendations, if any, did you give regarding this boiler system?
16. What kind of follow-up did you do after completing your design of the project at Frederick Douglas High School that is the subject of this lawsuit? Did you visit the site after the system was operational? Please provide with specificity the nature of the follow-up you claim that you did and when it was done.
17. Did you stop engineering where the boiler connects into the old breeching? If not, please provide all evidence which you intend to rely upon at trial that you considered the old boiler system in your design of system.
18. Did you consider the dampers in your design? Did you consider adjusting the damper?
19. Did you consider the stack in your design? Do we need to make modification to the stack?
20. Did you consider the ventilation in the room? Was the veneration automatic or manual in your calculations?

Respectfully submitted,

Miller & Zois, LLC

Ronald V. Miller, Jr.
Laura G. Zois
Miller & Zois, LLC
1 South St, #2450
Baltimore, MD 21202
(410)779-4600
(410)760-8922 (Fax)
Counsel for Plaintiffs