Rule 29.Stipulations About Discovery Procedure
Group V: Disclosures and Discovery · Last amended 2017 · Last verified July 14, 2026
Full Text of Rule 29
Comments
This rule is substantially similar to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 29, as amended in 2007, except that section (b) retains references to Superior Court Rule 16(b).
Identical to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 29 except for the reference to Superior Court Rule 16(b) with respect to deadlines.
Plain-English Summary
Rule 29 hands parties broad control over the mechanics of discovery, so long as the court has not ordered otherwise. They may stipulate that a deposition be taken before any person, at any time or place, and in whatever manner they choose, and a deposition taken that way can be used exactly like any deposition taken under the rules' default procedures. That flexibility lets counsel schedule around conflicts, choose a convenient location, or agree on a recording method without needing a motion or a court order every time.
The rule extends the same flexibility to other discovery procedures and limitations generally — parties can agree to modify how discovery is conducted or restrict its scope by consent. But Rule 29(b) draws one firm line: parties may only stipulate to extend a deadline the court has set to the extent Rule 16(b) permits. That keeps case schedules under the court's control even when both sides would rather handle a delay between themselves, so an agreement to push back a court-ordered discovery cutoff still has to satisfy whatever Rule 16(b) requires for extending it.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can the parties agree to change how a deposition will be conducted?
Yes. Rule 29(a) lets parties stipulate that a deposition be taken before any person, at any time or place, and in any manner they specify, and it can then be used just like any other deposition taken under the rules.
Can we just agree between ourselves to push back a discovery deadline the judge set?
Not entirely on your own. Rule 29(b) allows parties to modify most discovery procedures by agreement, but stipulations extending a court-ordered deadline are only effective to the extent Rule 16(b) permits.
Do we need the court's permission to modify discovery procedures generally?
No, not for most procedural matters. Unless the court has ordered otherwise, Rule 29 lets parties stipulate to modify the procedures and limitations governing discovery without seeking prior court approval.
Is a deposition taken under a Rule 29 stipulation treated differently than a normal deposition?
No. Rule 29(a) states that a deposition taken under a stipulation may be used in the same way as any other deposition, so its evidentiary treatment does not change just because the parties agreed to nonstandard terms for taking it.
Why can't parties just agree to extend a court-set discovery deadline on their own?
Rule 29(b) reserves that authority to the court by cross-referencing Rule 16(b), which governs modifying scheduling orders. The rule lets parties reshape most discovery mechanics by agreement, but keeps deadline extensions subject to the court's scheduling framework.