Del. Super. Ct. Civ. R. 26

(a) Discovery methods. Parties may obtain discovery by one or more of the following methods:

Depositions upon oral examination or written questions; written interrogatories; production of documents

or things or permission to enter upon land or other property, for inspection and other purposes; physical

and mental examinations; and requests for admission.

(b) Discovery scope and limits. Unless otherwise limited by order of the Court in accordance with these

rules, the scope of discovery is as follows:

(1) In general. Parties may obtain discovery regarding any non-privileged matter that is relevant to

any party’s claim or defense and proportional to the needs of the case, including the existence,

description, nature, custody, condition and location of any documents, electronically stored

information (ESI), or tangible things and the identity and location of persons having knowledge of

any discoverable matter. It is not ground for objection that the information sought will be

inadmissible at the trial.

The frequency or extent of use of the discovery methods set forth in paragraph (a) shall be limited by

the Court if it determines that: (i) the discovery sought is unreasonably cumulative or duplicative, or

is obtainable from some other source that is more convenient, less burdensome, or less expensive; (ii)

the party seeking discovery has had ample opportunity by discovery in the action to obtain the

information sought; or (iii) the discovery sought is not proportional to the needs of the case,

considering the importance of the issues at stake in the action, the amount in controversy, the parties’

relative access to relevant information, the parties’ resources, the importance of the discovery in

resolving the issues, and whether the burden or expense of the proposed discovery outweighs its

likely benefit. The Court may act upon its own initiative after reasonable notice or pursuant to a

motion under subdivision (c). 1

(2) Insurance agreements. A party may obtain discovery of the existence and contents of any

insurance agreement under which any person carrying on an insurance business may be liable to

satisfy part or all of a judgment which may be entered in the action or to indemnify or reimburse for

payments made to satisfy the judgment. Information concerning the insurance agreement is not by

reason of disclosure admissible in evidence at trial. For purposes of this paragraph, an application for

insurance shall not be treated as part of an insurance agreement.

1Comment: The 2019 amendment to Delaware Superior Court Rule 26(b)(1) follows the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in

confirming that relevance is the touchstone for discovery. Under this standard, relevant evidence is discoverable, even if it may

not be admissible. The 2019 amendment removes the qualification about the information appearing “reasonably calculated to

lead to the discovery of admissible evidence.” As the comments to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b)(1) explain, this phrase

“has been used by some, incorrectly, to define the scope of discovery.” To avoid this implication, the drafters of the federal rules

removed the language and replaced it with the direct statement that information within the scope of discovery need not be

admissible in evidence to be discoverable.Subject to other considerations, such as privilege and proportionality, all relevant

evidence is discoverable, whether or not it is admissible. This clarification is not intended to change the scope of available

discovery under the Delaware rules. The scope of discovery remains “broad and far-reaching....” Cal. Pub. Emps. Ret. Sys. v.

Coulter, 2004 WL 1238443, at *1 (Del. Ch. May 26, 2004) (citation omitted); see also Woodstock v. Wolf Creek Surgeons, P.A.,

2017 WL 3727019, (Del. Super. Aug. 30, 2017 at *6; Levy v. Stern, 687 A.2d 573, 1996 WL 742818, at *2 (Del. Dec. 20, 1996)

(Table) (noting that the “discovery rules are to be afforded broad and liberal treatment”); “[T]he spirit of Rule 26(b) calls for all

relevant information, however remote, to be brought out for inspection not only by the opposing party but also for the benefit of

the Court....” Boxer v. Husky Oil Co., 1981 WL 15479, at *2 (Del. Ch. Nov. 9, 1981). Relevance “must be viewed liberally,” and

discovery into relevant matters should be permitted if there is “any possibility that the discovery will lead to relevant evidence.”

Loretto Literary and Benevolent Inst. v. Blue Diamond Coal Co., 1980 WL 268060, at *4 (Del. Ch. Oct. 24, 1980); see also

Incyte Corporation v. Flexus Biosciences, Inc., 2017 WL 5128979, at *4 (Del. Super. Oct. 27, 2017) (as a general rule,

information sought in discovery is considered relevant “if there is any possibility that the information sought may be relevant to

the subject matter of the action.” (citations omitted).

(3) Trial preparation: Materials. Subject to the provisions of subdivision (b)(4) of this Rule, a party

may obtain discovery of documents and tangible things otherwise discoverable under subdivision

(b)(1) of this Rule and prepared in anticipation of litigation or for trial by or for another party or by or

for that other party’s representative (including the other party’s attorney, consultant, surety,

indemnitor, insurer or agent) only upon a showing that the party seeking discovery has substantial

need of the materials in the preparation of the party’s case and that the party is unable without undue

hardship to obtain the substantial equivalent of the materials by other means. In ordering the

discovery of such materials when the required showing has been made, the Court shall protect against

disclosure of the mental impressions, conclusions, opinions, or legal theories of an attorney or other

representative of a party concerning the litigation.

A party may obtain without the required showing a statement concerning the action or its subject

matter previously made by that party. Upon request, a person not a party may obtain without the

required showing a statement concerning the action or its subject matter previously made by that

person. If the request is refused, the person may move for a court order. The provisions of Rule

37(a)(4) apply to the award of expenses incurred in relation to the motion. For purposes of this

paragraph, a statement previously made is (A) a written statement signed or otherwise adopted or

approved by the person making it, or (B) a stenographic, mechanical, electrical, or other recording, or

a transcription thereof, which is a substantially verbatim recital of an oral statement by the party

making it and contemporaneously recorded.

(4) Trial preparation: Experts. Discovery of facts known and opinions held by experts, otherwise

discoverable under the provisions of subdivision (b)(1) of this Rule and acquired or developed in

anticipation of litigation or for trial, may be obtained only as follows:

(A)(i) A party may through interrogatories require any other party to identify each person whom

the other party expects to call as an expert witness at trial, to state the subject matter on which the

expert is expected to testify, and to state the substance of the facts and opinions to which the

expert is expected to testify and a summary of the grounds for each opinion. (ii) Upon motion, the

Court may order further discovery by other means, subject to such restrictions as to scope and

such provisions, pursuant to subdivision (b)(4)(C) of this Rule, concerning fees and expenses as

the Court may deem appropriate.

(B) A party may discover facts known or opinions held by an expert who has been retained or

specially employed by another party in anticipation of litigation or preparation for trial and who is

not expected to be called as a witness at trial, only as provided in Rule 35(b) or upon a showing

of exceptional circumstances under which it is impracticable for the party seeking discovery to

obtain facts or opinions on the same subject by other means.

(C) Unless manifest injustice would result, (i) the Court shall require that the party seeking

discovery pay the expert a reasonable fee for time spent in responding to discovery under

subdivisions (b)(4)(A)(ii) and (b)(4)(B) of this Rule; and (ii) with respect to discovery obtained

under subdivision (b)(4)(A)(ii) of this Rule the Court may require, and with respect to discovery

obtained under subdivision (b)(4)(B) of this Rule the Court shall require, the party seeking

discovery to pay the other party a fair portion of the fees and expenses reasonably incurred by the

latter party in obtaining facts and opinions from the expert.

(5) Protection for draft reports or disclosures. Rule 26(b)(3) protects drafts of any report or

disclosure required under Rule 26 regardless of the form in which a draft is recorded.

(6) Protection of communication between a party’s attorney and expert witnesses. Rule 26 protects

communications between the party’s attorney and any witness required to provide an opinion under

Rule 26(b)(4) regardless of the form of the communications, except to the extent that

communications:

(i) relate to compensation for the expert study or testimony;

(ii) identify facts or data that the party’s attorney provided and that the expert considered in

forming the opinions to be expressed; or

(iii) identify assumptions that the party’s attorney provided and that the expert relied on in

forming the opinions to be expressed.

(7) Claims of privilege or protection of trial material. When a party withholds information otherwise

discoverable under these rules by claiming that it is privileged or subject to protection as trial

preparation material, the party shall make the claim expressly and shall describe the nature of the

documents, communications or things not produced or disclosed in a manner that, without revealing

information itself privileged or protected, will enable other parties to assess the applicability of the

privilege or protection.

(c) Protective orders. Upon motion by a party or by the person from whom discovery is sought, and for

good cause shown, the Court or alternatively, on matters relating to a deposition taken outside the State of

Delaware, a court in the state where the deposition is to be taken may make any order which justice

requires to protect a party or person from annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, or undue burden or

expense, including one or more of the following: (1) that the discovery not be had; (2) that the discovery

may be had only on specified terms and conditions, including a designation of the time or place or the

allocation of expenses; (3) that the discovery may be had only by a method of discovery other than that

selected by the party seeking discovery; (4) that certain matters not be inquired into, or that the scope of

the discovery be limited to certain matters; (5) that discovery be conducted with no one present except

persons designated by the Court; (6) that a deposition after being sealed be opened only by order of the

Court; (7) that a trade secret or other confidential research, development, or commercial information not

be disclosed or be disclosed only in a designated way; (8) that the parties simultaneously file specified

documents or information enclosed in sealed envelopes to be opened as directed by the Court. A party has

standing to move for a protective order with respect to discovery directed at a non-party on the basis of

annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, or undue burden or expense that the moving party will bear. A

non-party from another state from whom discovery is sought always may move for a protective order

from the court in the state where discovery is sought or, alternatively, from this Court provided the non-party agrees to be bound by the decision of this Court as to the discovery in question.

If the motion for a protective order is denied in whole or in part, the Court may, on such terms and

conditions as are just, order that any party or person provide or permit discovery. The provisions of Rule

37(a)(4) apply to the award of expenses incurred in relation to the motion.

(d) Sequence and timing of discovery. Unless the Court upon motion, for the convenience of parties and

witnesses and in the interests of justice, orders otherwise, methods of discovery may be used in any

sequence and the fact that a party is conducting discovery, whether by deposition or otherwise, shall not

operate to delay any other party’s discovery.

(e) Supplementation of responses. A party who has responded to a request for discovery with a response

that was complete when made is under no duty to supplement the response to include information

thereafter acquired except as follows:

(1) A party is under a duty seasonably to supplement the response with respect to any question

directly addressed to (A) the identity and location of persons having knowledge of discoverable

matters, and (B) the identity of each person expected to be called as an expert witness at trial, the

subject matter on which the person is expected to testify, and the substance of the person’s testimony.

(2) A party is under a duty seasonably to amend a prior response if the party obtains information upon

the basis of which (A) the party knows that the response was incorrect when made, or (B) the party

knows that the response although correct when made is no longer true and the circumstances are such

that a failure to amend the response is in substance a knowing concealment.

(3) A duty to supplement responses may be imposed by order of the Court, agreement of the parties,

or at any time prior to trial through new requests for supplementation of prior responses.

(f) Discovery conference. At any time after commencement of an action the Court may direct the

attorneys for the parties to appear before it for a conference on the subject of discovery. The Court shall

do so upon motion by the attorney for any party if the motion includes:

(1) A statement of the issues as they then appear;

(2) A proposed plan and schedule of discovery;

(3) Any limitations proposed to be placed on discovery;

(4) Any other proposed orders with respect to discovery; and

(5) A statement showing that the attorney making the motion has made a reasonable effort to reach

agreement with opposing attorneys on the matters set forth in the motion. Each party and each party’s

attorney are under a duty to participate in good faith in the framing of a discovery plan if a plan is

proposed by the attorney for any party. Notice of the motion shall be served on all parties. Objections

or additions to matters set forth in the motion shall be served not later than 10 days after service of the

motion.

Following the discovery conference, the Court shall enter an order tentatively identifying the issues for

discovery purposes, establishing a plan and schedule for discovery, setting limitations on discovery, if

any; and determining such other matters, including the allocation of expenses, as are necessary for the

proper management of discovery in the action. An order may be altered or amended whenever justice so

requires.

Subject to the right of a party who properly moves for a discovery conference to prompt convening of the

conference, the Court may combine the discovery conference with a pretrial conference authorized by

Rule 16.

(g) Signing of discovery requests, responses, and objections. Every request for discovery or response or

objection thereto made by a party represented by an attorney shall be signed by at least one attorney of

record in the attorney’s individual name, whose address shall be stated. A party who is not represented by

an attorney shall sign the request, response, or objection and state the party’s address. The signature of the

attorney or party constitutes a certification that the signer has read the request, response, or objection, and

that to the best of the signer’s knowledge, information, and belief formed after a reasonable inquiry it is:

(1) Consistent with these rules and warranted by existing law or a good faith argument for the extension,

modification, or reversal of existing law; (2) not interposed for any improper purpose, such as to harass or

to cause unnecessary delay or needless increase in the cost of litigation; and (3) not unreasonable or

unduly burdensome or expensive, given the needs of the case, the discovery already had in the case, the

amount in controversy, and the importance of the issues at stake in the litigation. If a request, response, or

objection is not signed, it shall be stricken unless it is signed promptly after the omission is called to the

attention of the party making the request, response or objection and a party shall not be obligated to take

any action with respect to it until it is signed.

If a certification is made in violation of the rule, the Court, upon motion, or upon its own initiative, shall

impose upon the person who made the certification, the party on whose behalf the request, response, or

objection is made, or both, an appropriate sanction, which may include an order to pay the amount of the

reasonable expenses incurred because of the violation, including a reasonable attorney’s fee.