James:
In reference to your other thread let me say that only someone completely ignorant of federal civil procedure would have suggested that you should know the “rules forward and backwards” before filing a complaint.
The ignorance of assuming you are Pro Se because you couldn’t find an attorney to take your case on a contingency is exceeded only by the moronic “assumption squared” remark that the merits of your case are questionable! It would have been laughable except that it probably prevented someone who KNEW the answer to your question from answering.
I did love that profound remark I saw in one post. It read, “...it will be nearly impossible to win in pro se, if the case has no merit.” I’m going to have that put on a bumper sticker I think.
I'm sure you know that even if you did know the FRCP forward and backwards, there are more than a few rules that fail to acknowledge certain facts specific to Pro Se parties. Of course you will need to ask procedural questions from time to time!
The answer to both of your questions should be found in FRCP 26(f) (Megan winks at BA), reprinted here for your convenience:
Except in categories of proceedings exempted from initial disclosure under Rule 26(a)(1)(E) or when otherwise ordered, the parties must, as soon as practicable and in any event at least 21 days before a scheduling conference is held or a scheduling order is due under Rule 16(b), confer to consider the nature and basis of their claims and defenses and the possibilities for a prompt settlement or resolution of the case, to make or arrange for the disclosures required by Rule 26(a)(1), and to develop a proposed discovery plan that indicates the parties' views and proposals concerning...
In plain English, as soon as the complaint and answer have been filed, all parties and/or their representatives, should meet to discuss and agree upon plans for discovery. The meeting is the time for you to provide initial disclosure information as listed in FRCP 26(a)(1).
The local rules for the USDC for Rhode Island are not on line yet. You need to consult local rule 26(f) to see if it mentions Pro Se parties.
Some of the USDCs allow actions involving a Pro Se party to proceed with discovery without having a meeting between parties. This is a measure that protects the PS from some problems, but saddles them with others.
If you don’t have the meeting, you will have no agreed upon discovery plan with the defendant. Lack of a written plan will make it possible for them to jerk you around almost endlessly.
If you do have the meeting, you will be in a very vulnerable position with the defense attorney. In an effort to appear cooperative, you could end up waiving valuable rights.
My suggestion is that you contact the other side and ask them to “meet” with you via email. This would allow you time to research and consider any requests they make before having to respond to them. Each of you can list your discovery needs and plans, send it to the other, and come up with a plan that is acceptable to both of you.
Also, is a copy sent to the court?
As always, you should consult your Local Rules, but it is highly unlikely that they want your initial disclosures.
