Rule 37.Failure to cooperate in discovery; sanctions

Discovery only works if both sides play along, and Rule 37 backs it up with consequences. A party who isn't getting the discovery it's entitled to can move to compel an answer, a designation, production, or an inspection, but only after certifying it tried in good faith to work things out without court intervention. The motion goes to the court where the case is pending, or, for discovery happening outside Idaho, to the court where that discovery is taken. Specific grounds include a deponent who won't answer a question, an entity that won't designate a Rule 30(b)(6) or 31(a)(4) witness, a party that won't answer an interrogatory, or a party that won't permit an inspection — and an evasive or incomplete answer counts as no answer at all. Whichever way the motion comes out, someone typically pays: if it's granted, or the discovery shows up only after the motion was filed, the resisting party or its attorney generally owes the movant's reasonable expenses, including attorney's fees, unless the motion was filed too hastily, the resistance was substantially justified, or some other circumstance makes an award unjust. If it's denied, that same expense-shifting runs the other way, and if the motion is granted in part and denied in part, the court can apportion expenses and issue a protective order.

Disobeying an actual court order raises the stakes further. If the discovery happened outside Idaho and the deponent won't answer as ordered, that's treated as contempt of either court. Where the action is pending, a party who defies a discovery order faces a menu of sanctions: facts taken as established, evidence or defenses barred, pleadings struck, the case stayed, the case dismissed, a default judgment entered, or contempt proceedings — plus, unless the failure was substantially justified, a mandatory order to pay the resulting expenses and fees. A separate, related set of consequences applies without needing a prior order at all: failing to supplement a discovery response or comply with a court-ordered disclosure blocks the use of that information or witness later, unless the failure was substantially justified or harmless, and failing to admit something under Rule 36 that later gets proven true or genuine can mean paying the cost of proving it up. A party who skips its own deposition, or ignores interrogatories or a request for production entirely, faces the same range of sanctions on motion, and can't excuse it by claiming the discovery was objectionable unless a protective order motion is pending. One safe harbor exists: a court generally can't sanction a party for losing electronically stored information through the routine, good-faith operation of an ordinary information system. And a catch-all provision backs up every other part of the rule, letting the court impose sanctions or fees for violating any order made under these discovery rules.