Oregon requests for admission: a warning in capital letters, 30 requests, and 45 days for a defendant

Requests for admission matter more in Oregon than in most systems, because there are no interrogatories. ORCP 36 A lists four discovery methods, and admissions are the only written device that puts a proposition to the other side and demands a yes or no.

ORCP 45 takes the automatic-admission consequence seriously enough to make you print a warning about it.

The warning you must print

ORCP 45 A ends with a formatting requirement no other jurisdiction on this site imposes:

The request for admissions shall be preceded by the following statement printed in capital letters in a font size at least as large as that in which the request is printed: FAILURE TO SERVE A WRITTEN ANSWER OR OBJECTION WITHIN THE TIME ALLOWED BY ORCP 45 B. WILL RESULT IN ADMISSION OF THE FOLLOWING REQUESTS.

Exact words, capital letters, and a font at least as large as the requests themselves. It exists because the consequence of ignoring the document is that everything in it becomes true.

If you are serving requests, this is the first line of the document. If you are receiving them, its presence tells you what is at stake before you read request number one.

What you may ask about

ORCP 45 A: after commencement of an action, a party may serve on any other party a request for the admission of "the truth of relevant matters within the scope of Rule 36 B specified in the request, including facts or opinions of fact, or the application of law to fact, or of the genuineness of any relevant documents or physical objects described in or exhibited with the request."

Copies of documents must be served with the request "unless they have been or are otherwise furnished or made available for inspection and copying."

Each matter of which an admission is requested shall be separately set forth.

When you may serve: without leave, "on the plaintiff after commencement of the action and on any other party with or after service of the summons and complaint on that party."

Thirty days — but 45 for a defendant

ORCP 45 B:

The matter is admitted unless, within 30 days after service of the request, or within such shorter or longer time as the court may allow, the party to whom the request is directed serves on the party requesting the admission a written answer or objection addressed to the matter, signed by the party or by the party's attorney; but, unless the court shortens the time, a defendant shall not be required to serve answers or objections before the expiration of 45 days after service of the summons and complaint on that defendant.

That second clause is easy to misread. It is not an extension of the 30 days for every defendant — it is a floor. A defendant served with requests early in the case cannot be required to answer before day 45 from service of the summons and complaint. A defendant served with requests six months in gets the ordinary 30 days.

Oregon and Hawaii are the two jurisdictions on this site that give a defendant extra time on admissions. Washington and Georgia extend the defendant's clock for interrogatories and document requests but pointedly do not extend it for admissions, precisely because of the automatic-admission consequence.

The admission is automatic. No motion is required, unlike California, where CCP 2033.280(b) makes the requesting party move for an order deeming matters admitted.

What a proper answer looks like

The rest of ORCP 45 B:

• If objection is made, the reasons therefor shall be stated.
• The answer "shall specifically deny the matter or set forth in detail the reasons why the answering party cannot truthfully admit or deny the matter."
• "A denial shall fairly meet the substance of the requested admission," and where good faith requires a qualified answer or a partial denial, the party "shall specify so much of it as is true and qualify or deny the remainder."
• Lack of information is not available as a reason "unless the answering party states that reasonable inquiry has been made and that the information known or readily obtainable … is insufficient."

And you cannot object because the matter is contested. The rule addresses that argument directly:

A party who considers that a matter of which an admission has been requested presents a genuine issue for trial may not, on that ground alone, object to the request; the party may, subject to the provisions of Rule 46 C, deny the matter or set forth reasons why the party cannot admit or deny it.

The cross-reference is the point. Rule 46 C awards the expenses of proof against a party who denies something the other side then proves. The rule tells you to deny rather than object, and then attaches a price to denying wrongly.

Answer in the space provided

ORCP 45 E:

The request for admissions shall be so arranged that a blank space shall be provided after each separately numbered request. The space shall be reasonably calculated to enable the answering party to insert the admissions, denials, or objections within the space. If sufficient space is not provided, the answering party may attach additional papers with the admissions, denials, or objections and refer to them in the space provided in the request.

The drafting burden sits on the propounding party, as it does under Washington's CR 33(a) for interrogatories and Alaska's Rule 33(a). And the rule supplies the remedy where the space is inadequate, so a cramped set of requests is an inconvenience rather than an excuse.

Thirty requests, counted strictly

ORCP 45 F(1):

a party may serve more than one set of requested admissions on an adverse party but the total number of requests shall not exceed 30, unless the court otherwise orders for good cause shown after the proposed additional requests have been filed.

Note how leave works here: the additional requests must be filed before the court rules. You do not ask for a number in the abstract; you put the actual requests in front of the judge.

And the counting rule is strict:

In determining what constitutes a request for admission for the purpose of applying this limitation in number, it is intended that each request be counted separately, whether or not it is subsidiary or incidental to or dependent upon or included in another request, and however the requests may be grouped, combined, or arranged.

There is no drafting around the 30. Subparts count. Nested requests count. Grouping does not help.

One exception — ORCP 45 F(2): in addition to the 30, a party may serve "a reasonable number of additional requests for admission to establish the authenticity and admissibility of documents under ORS 40.460 (6) (Rule 803(6) of the Oregon Evidence Code)."

That is the business-records exception, and it is a practical necessity: authenticating a hundred invoices would otherwise consume the entire allowance three times over. Use ORCP 45 F(2) for foundation, and save the 30 for substance.

Testing an inadequate answer

ORCP 45 C: the requesting party may move to determine the sufficiency of the answers or objections.

• "Unless the court determines that an objection is justified, it shall order that an answer be served."
• "If the court determines that an answer does not comply … it may order either that the matter is admitted or that an amended answer be served."
• The court may instead "determine that final disposition of the request be made at a designated time prior to trial."

Expenses on the motion are governed by ORCP 46 A(4), which shifts fees to the losing side on a motion to compel unless the position was substantially justified.

There is no deadline in ORCP 45 C for bringing this motion. California, by contrast, imposes a hard 45-day waiver under CCP 2033.290(c).

What an admission does, and where it stops

ORCP 45 D:

Any matter admitted pursuant to this rule is conclusively established unless the court on motion permits withdrawal or amendment of the admission. The court may permit withdrawal or amendment when the presentation of the merits of the case will be furthered and the party who obtained the admission fails to satisfy the court that withdrawal or amendment will prejudice that party in maintaining that party's case or that party's defense on the merits.

Note where the burden sits: the party resisting withdrawal must show prejudice. That is the reverse of California's CCP 2033.300(b), which requires the withdrawing party to establish mistake, inadvertence or excusable neglect and the absence of substantial prejudice.

And the admission does not travel. It "is for the purpose of the pending action only, and neither constitutes an admission by that party for any other purpose nor may be used against that party in any other action."

Cost-of-proof expenses

ORCP 46 C: if a party fails to admit the genuineness of a document or the truth of a matter requested under Rule 45, and the requesting party thereafter proves it, that party may apply for an order requiring payment of the reasonable expenses incurred in making the proof, including attorney fees.

This is what makes a reflexive denial expensive, and it is the reason ORCP 45 B tells you that a genuine-issue objection is not available.

How Oregon compares

A short checklist

Serving them

1. Print the ORCP 45 A warning first, in capitals, at least as large as the requests.
2. Count to 30, remembering that subparts and grouped requests each count.
3. Use ORCP 45 F(2) for document foundation rather than spending your 30 on authenticity.
4. Leave a blank space after each numbered request.
5. Attach the documents whose genuineness you want admitted.
6. At the end of the case, look at ORCP 46 C for anything they denied that you had to prove.

Responding to them

1. Calendar 30 days — but check the 45-day floor if you are a defendant recently served.
2. Answer every request. Silence admits, automatically and without a motion.
3. Do not object because the matter is disputed. Deny it instead; the rule says so.
4. If you plead lack of information, state that you made a reasonable inquiry.
5. A denial must fairly meet the substance — a general denial of a compound request will not do.
6. If you need to undo an admission, move under ORCP 45 D — the other side has to show prejudice.

Where these rules live

• ORCP 36 — General Provisions Governing Discovery
• ORCP 39 — Depositions upon Oral Examination
• ORCP 43 — Production of Documents and Things
• ORCP 44 — Physical and Mental Examination of Persons
• ORCP 45 — Requests for Admission
• ORCP 46 — Failure to Make Discovery; Sanctions
• ORCP 47 — Summary Judgment

The Oregon Judicial Department publishes court information at courts.oregon.gov. This page explains what the rules say. It isn't legal advice, and the Oregon Evidence Code provision the business-records exception cross-references is outside what this site reproduces.