Art. 1427.Sequence and Timing of Discovery
Book II. Ordinary Proceedings · Title III. Production of Evidence · Chapter 3. Discovery · Enacted 1976 · no amendments on record · Last verified July 30, 2026
Full Text of Art. 1427
Amendment History
Acts 1976, No. 574, §1.
Plain-English Summary
Article 1427 doesn't give anyone first crack at discovery. Parties can use discovery methods in any sequence they choose, and the fact that one party is conducting discovery -- by deposition or otherwise -- doesn't operate to delay any other party's discovery.
In practice, that means a defendant doesn't have to wait for the plaintiff to finish written discovery before noticing a deposition, and a plaintiff doesn't have to hold off on interrogatories while a deposition is pending. Multiple methods, used by multiple parties, can run at the same time.
The default isn't absolute. On motion, for the convenience of the parties and witnesses and in the interest of justice, the court can order a different sequence -- useful when, for example, a particular deposition should happen before written discovery makes sense, or when overlapping discovery is creating unnecessary conflict.
Frequently Asked Questions
Does a plaintiff get to conduct discovery before the defendant in Louisiana?
No. Article 1427 doesn't give either side priority; discovery methods can be used in whatever order the parties choose.
Can I notice a deposition while written discovery is still pending?
Yes. One party's ongoing discovery doesn't delay another party's discovery, so different methods can proceed at the same time.
Can a court change the normal order in which discovery happens?
Yes. On motion, for the convenience of the parties and witnesses or in the interest of justice, the court can order a different sequence.