Rule 29.Stipulations regarding discovery procedure.

Discovery rules are full of default settings: who presides over a deposition, how much notice is required, where it happens. Rule 29 lets the parties override those defaults by written agreement. If both sides would rather use a court reporter who is not technically an authorized officer, hold a deposition on shorter notice, or run it somewhere more convenient than the rule would otherwise require, they can agree to it in writing, and that agreement controls in place of the rule's normal requirements. The same flexibility extends to other discovery methods, letting parties adjust the built-in procedures for interrogatories, document requests, or requests for admission by mutual agreement rather than by asking a judge to bless every minor departure.

The point of Rule 29 is to keep small procedural disagreements from turning into motions. Litigation moves faster and costs less when opposing counsel can shake hands on scheduling and mechanics instead of burning time and money getting a judge to sign off on routine adjustments. The court still has the final word, since the rule only applies unless the court has ordered otherwise, so a judge can step in and override a stipulation if it interferes with how the case needs to be managed. But absent that kind of intervention, a written stipulation between the parties is enough to change how discovery unfolds.