Request for Admissions
(PA)

Summary

This template is a boilerplate request for admissions (RFAs) for use in a civil action in Pennsylvania. It illustrates the general structure and format of such requests and includes some generic RFAs pertaining to the genuineness of documents and other foundational requirements for the admissibility of documentary evidence. This template includes practical guidance and drafting notes. Pa. R.C.P. No. 4014 is a discovery tool that can be used to clarify issues, expedite litigation, and facilitate a decision based on the merits. You should not use requests for admissions as a means to trick opposing counsel into admitting dispositive facts or in the hopes that counsel will fail to respond in a timely manner, as the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has instructed trial courts to forgive such inadvertent, or even negligent, admissions. See Stimmler v. Chestnut Hill Hosp., 602 Pa. 539, 564 n.18 (2009). Requests for admissions are among the most misused and underused tools of civil discovery, and can be a missed opportunity with respect to trial practice. Many practitioners routinely fail to use requests for admissions to establish a document's: • Genuineness • Authenticity • Correctness • Execution • Signing • Delivery –and– • Mailing or receipt Pa. R. Civ. P. 4014. In turn, many practitioners improperly serve requests for admissions that undoubtedly will be denied by the responding party in the hope that the responding party will fail to answer within 30 days and thereby render the various requests to be deemed admitted. Such gamesmanship remains common today, but it is pointless as the Pennsylvania Supreme Court and Pennsylvania Superior Court have both expressly held that requests for admissions should not be used to resolve the merits of the action, but rather should be used to streamline trial by removing from dispute matters which should not in good faith be disputed. Accordingly, those courts have reversed several trial court opinions deeming matters admitted for modest delays in serving objections and denials. See Stimmler v. Chestnut Hill Hosp., 602 Pa. 539, 564 n.18 (2009); Reilly v. Ernst & Young, LLP, 929 A.2d 1193, 1200–1201 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2007). The RFAs should be drafted so that they can easily be responded to with a yes or no answer. If the requests are confusing or vague, the responses might not be treated as conclusive. Specific requests relating to the facts and issues in the case and the parties' contentions should be inserted into this template as appropriate. For related practice notes, see Requests for Admission: Drafting and Serving RFAs (PA) and Requests for Admission: Responding to RFAs (PA).