TX · rules

Tex. R. Civ. P. 193

Written Discovery: Response; Objection; Assertion of Privilege; Supplementation and Amendment; Failure to Timely Respond; Presumption of Authenticity

activein force · 2026-07-01 – presentact-effective-date

193.1 Responding to Written Discovery; Duty to Make Complete Response.

A party must respond to written discovery in writing within the time provided by court order or

these rules. When responding to written discovery, a party must make a complete response, based

on all information reasonably available to the responding party or its attorney at the time the

response is made. The responding party's answers, objections, and other responses must be

preceded by the request or required disclosure to which they apply.

193.2 Objecting to Written Discovery

(a) Form and time for objections. A party must make any objection to written discovery in

writing - either in the response or in a separate document - within the time for response.

The party must state specifically the legal or factual basis for the objection and the extent

to which the party is refusing to comply with the request.

(b) Duty to respond when partially objecting; objection to time or place of production.

A party must comply with as much of the request to which the party has made no objection

unless it is unreasonable under the circumstances to do so before obtaining a ruling on the

objection. If the responding party objects to the requested time or place of production, the

responding party must state a reasonable time and place for complying with the request

and must comply at that time and place without further request or order.

faith factual and legal basis for the objection exists at the time the objection is made.

(d) Amendment. An objection or response to written discovery may be amended or

supplemented to state an objection or basis that, at the time the objection or response

initially was made, either was inapplicable or was unknown after reasonable inquiry.

(e) Waiver of objection. An objection that is not made within the time required, or that is

obscured by numerous unfounded objections, is waived unless the court excuses the waiver

for good cause shown.

(f) No objection to preserve privilege. A party should not object to a request for written

discovery on the grounds that it calls for production of material or information that is

privileged but should instead comply with Rule 193.3. A party who objects to production

of privileged material or information does not waive the privilege but must comply with

Rule 193.3 when the error is pointed out.

193.3 Asserting a Privilege

A party may preserve a privilege from written discovery in accordance with this subdivision.

(a) Withholding privileged material or information. A party who claims that

material or information responsive to written discovery is privileged may withhold

the privileged material or information from the response. The party must state --in

the response (or an amended or supplemental response) or in a separate document-

-that:

(1) information or material responsive to the request or required disclosure has

been withheld,

(2) the request or required disclosure to which the information or material

relates, and

(3) the privilege or privileges asserted.

(b) Description of withheld material or information. After receiving a response

indicating that material or information has been withheld from production, a party

seeking discovery may serve a written request that the withholding party identify

the information and material withheld. Within 15 days of service of that request,

the withholding party must serve a response that:

(1) describes the information or materials withheld that, without revealing the

privileged information itself or otherwise waiving the privilege, enables

other parties to assess the applicability of the privilege, and

(2) asserts a specific privilege for each item or group of items withheld.

withhold a privileged communication to or from a lawyer or lawyer's representative

or a privileged document of a lawyer or lawyer's representative

(1) created or made from the point at which a party consults a lawyer with a

view to obtaining professional legal services from the lawyer in the

prosecution or defense of a specific claim in the litigation in which

discovery is requested or required, and

(2) concerning the litigation in which the discovery is requested or required.

(d) Privilege not waived by production. A party who produces material or

information without intending to waive a claim of privilege does not waive that

claim under these rules or the Rules of Evidence if - within ten days or a shorter

time ordered by the court, after the producing party actua lly discovers that such

production was made - the producing party amends the response, identifying the

material or information produced and stating the privilege asserted. If the producing

party thus amends the response to assert a privilege, any party who has obtained

the specific material or information must promptly return the specified material or

information and any copies pending any ruling by the court denying the privilege.

193.4 Hearing and Ruling on Objections and Assertions of Privilege.

(a) Hearing. Any party may at any reasonable time request a hearing on an objection or claim

of privilege asserted under this rule. The party making the objection or asserting the

privilege must present any evidence necessary to support the objection or privilege. The

evidence may be testimony presented at the hearing or affidavits served at least seven days

before the hearing or at such other reasonable time as the court permits. If the court

determines that an in camera review of some or all of the requested discovery or required

disclosure is necessary, that material or information must be segregated and produced to

the court in a sealed wrapper within a reasonable time following the hearing.

(b) Ruling. To the extent the court sustains the objection or claim of privilege, the responding

party has no further duty to respond to that request or required disclosure. To the extent the

court overrules the objection or claim of privilege, the responding party must produce the

requested or required material or information within 30 days after the court's ruling or at

such time as the court orders. A party need not request a ruling on that party's own objection

or assertion of privilege to preserve the objection or privilege.

use--at any hearing or trial--material or information withheld from discovery under a claim

of privilege, including a claim sustained by the court, without timely amending or

supplementing the party's response to that discovery.

193.5 Amending or Supplementing Responses to Written Discovery.

(a) Duty to amend or supplement. If a party learns that the party's response to written

discovery was incomplete or incorrect when made, or, although complete and correct when

made, is no longer complete and correct, the party must amend or supplement the response:

(1) to the extent that the written discovery sought the identification of persons with

knowledge of relevant facts, trial witnesses, or expert witnesses, and

(2) to the extent that the written discovery sought other information, unless the

additional or corrective information has been made known to the other parties in

writing, on the record at a deposition, or through other discovery responses.

(b) Time and form of amended or supplemental response. An amended or supplemental

response must be made reasonably promptly after the party discovers the necessity for such

a response. Except as otherwise provided by these rules, it is presumed that an amended or

supplemental response made less than 30 days before trial was not made reasonably

promptly. An amended or supplemental response must be in the same form as the initial

response and must be verified by the party if the original response was require d to be

verified by the party, but the failure to comply with this requirement does not make the

amended or supplemental response untimely unless the party making the response refuses

to correct the defect within a reasonable time after it is pointed out.

193.6 Failing to Timely Respond - Effect on Trial

(a) Exclusion of evidence and exceptions. A party who fails to make, amend, or supplement

a discovery response, including a required disclosure, in a timely manner may not introduce

in evidence the material or information that was not timely disclosed, or offer the testimony

of a witness (other than a named party) who was not timely identified, unless the court

finds that:

(1) there was good cause for the failure to timely make, amend, or supplement the

discovery response; or

(2) the failure to timely make, amend, or supplement the discovery response will not

unfairly surprise or unfairly prejudice the other parties.

(b) Burden of establishing exception. The burden of establishing good cause or the lack of

unfair surprise or unfair prejudice is on the party seeking to introduce the evidence or call

the witness. A finding of good cause or of the lack of unfair surprise or unfair prejudice

must be supported by the record.

to carry the burden under paragraph (b), the court may grant a continuance or temporarily

postpone the trial to allow a response to be made, amended, or supplemented, and to allow

opposing parties to conduct discovery regarding any new information presented by that

response.

193.7 Production of Documents Self-Authenticating

A party's production of a document in response to written discovery authenticates the document

for use against that party in any pretrial proceeding or at trial unless - within ten days or a longer

or shorter time ordered by the court, after the producing party has actual notice that the document

will be used - the party objects to the authenticity of the document, or any part of it, stating the

specific basis for objection. An objection must be either on the record or in writing and must have

a good faith factual and legal basis. An objection made to the authenticity of only part of a

document does not affect the authenticity of the remainder. If objection is made, the party

attempting to use the document should be given a reasonable opportunity to establis h its

authenticity.

History

Notes and Comments Comment to 1999 change: 1. This rule imposes a duty upon parties to make a complete response to written discovery based upon all information reasonable available, subject to objections and privileges. 2. An objection to a written discovery does not excuse the responding party from complying with the request to the extent no objection is made. But a party may object to a request for “all documents relevant to the lawsuit” as overly broad and not in complia nce with the rule requiring specific requests for documents and refuse to comply with it entirely. See Loftin v. Martin, 776 S.W.2d 145 (Tex. 1989). A party may also object to a request for a litigation file on the ground that it is overly broad and may assert that on its face the request seeks only materials protected by privilege. See National Union Fire Ins. Co. v. Valdez, 863 S.W.2d 458 (Tex. 1993). A party who objects to production of documents from a remote time period should produce documents from a more recent period unless that production would be burdensome and duplicative should the objection be overruled. 3. This rule governs the presentation of all privileges including work product. It dispenses with objections to written discovery requests on the basis that responsive information or materials are protected by a specific privilege from discovery. Instead, the rule requires parties to state that information or materials have been withheld and to identify the privilege upon which the party relies. The statement should not be made prophylactically, but only when specific information and materials have been withheld. The party must amend or supplement the statement if additional privileged information or material is found subsequent to the initial response. Thus, when large numbers of documents are being produced, a party may amend the initial response when documents are found as to which the party claims privilege. A party need not state that material created by or for lawyers for the litigation has been withheld as it can be assumed that such material will be withheld from virtually any request on the grounds of attorney-client privilege or work product. However, the rule does not prohibit a party from specifically requesting the material or information if the party has a good faith basis for asserting that it is discoverable. An example would be material or inf ormation described by Rule 503(d)(1) of the Rules of Evidence. 4. Rule 193.3(d) is a new provision that allows a party to assert a claim of privilege to material or information produced inadvertently without intending to waive the privilege. The provision is commonly used in complex cases to reduce costs and risks in la rge document productions. The focus is on the intent to waive the privilege, not the intent to produce the material or information. A party who fails to diligently screen documents before producing them does not waive a claim of privilege. This rule is thus broader than Tex. R. Evid. 511 and overturns Granada Corp. v. First Court of Appeals, 844 S.W.2d 223 (Tex. 1992), to the extent the two conflict. The ten-day period (which may be shortened by the court) allowed for an amended response does not run from the production of the material or information but from the party’s first awareness of t he mistake. To avoid complications at trial, a party may identify prior to trial the documents intended to be offered, thereby triggering the obligation to assert any overlooked privilege under this rule. A trial court may also order this procedure. 5. This rule imposes no duty to supplement or amend deposition testimony. The only duty to supplement deposition testimony is provided in Rule 195.6. 6. Any party can request a hearing in which the court will resolve issues brought up in objections or withholding statements. The party seeking to avoid discovery has the burden of proving the objection or privilege. 7. The self-authenticating provision is new. Authentication is, of course, but a condition precedent to admissibility and does not establish admissibility. See Tex. R. Evid. 901(a). The ten-day period allowed for objection to authenticity (which period may be altered by the court in appropriate circumstances) does not run from the production of the material or information but from the party’s actual awareness that the document will be used. To avoid complications at trial, a party may identify prior to trial the documents intended to be offered, thereby triggering the obligation to object to authenticity. A trial court may also order this procedure. An objection to authenticity must be made in good faith.

Provenance

Source: txcourts.gov
Retrieved: 2026-09-15
Edition: 2026-09-14
Content hash: c2d3015917b7e5cbdd6314c54de070be99ffedc044defcf1b6a5ff0fdc534cad

View the official source →

The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.

Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.

Coverage · API docs