The parties may by agreement (1) provide that depositions may be taken before any person, at any time or place, upon any notice, and in any manner, and when so taken may be used like other depositions, and (2) modify the procedures pro- vided by these rules for methods of discovery.
Rule 4002.Agreement Regarding Discovery or Deposition Procedure.
Last amended November 20, 1978 · Last verified June 30, 2026
In one sentenceThe parties may agree to vary the discovery and deposition procedures — taking depositions before any person, at any time or place, on any notice, and using them as if regularly taken — and to modify other discovery methods.
Full Text of Rule 4002
Plain-English Summary
This rule lets the parties tailor discovery by agreement. They may provide that depositions be taken before any person, at any time or place, on any notice and in any manner, and that such depositions may be used like regularly taken ones; they may likewise agree to modify other discovery procedures.
The Official Note recommends putting the agreement in writing. Allowing the parties to shape their own discovery keeps the process practical and cooperative, avoiding needless formality where both sides consent to a simpler path.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can the parties change the discovery rules by agreement?
Yes. They may agree to vary deposition procedure and modify other discovery methods.
Should the agreement be in writing?
The Official Note advises that it is best put in writing.
Official Note
Official Note: See Rule 201 for advisability of writing.
Explanatory Note The amendments of this Rule make two changes in present practice. First, they enlarge the rights of the parties by permitting them to agree to modify the procedures for discovery as well as for the taking of depositions. This will be broader than Fed. R. Civ.P. 29 as amended in 1970. The Federal Rule requires court approval of any agreement to extend the time for responses in three instances during the discovery stage. The amendments to Rule 4002 do not incor- porate this limitation. The need for leave of court to extend time may act as a spur to prompt responses but it must be balanced against the need for conservation of judicial manpower of already overburdened courts. Busy judges normally approve stipulations of counsel with respect to extra- judicial matters at the early stages of litigation. Little will be gained as a practical matter by requiring leave, and the need for hearing could actually accentuate delay. If one party agrees to give his oppo- nent extra time to answer, why should the judge intervene and refuse? Second, the phrase ‘‘stipulate in writing’’ in the prior Rule is changed to read ‘‘by agreement.’’ This will validate the common practice during the taking of oral depositions of dictating various stipulations to the reporter for inclusion in the transcript. Technically such a stipulation is not an ‘‘agreement in writing’’ within the meaning of the Business of the Court Rule 201 and is not an agreement ‘‘at bar’’ since no judge is present and the deposition is not taken in a courtroom. Counsel will be well advised to confirm such agreements in writing to avoid misunderstandings.
Amendment History
The provisions of this Rule 4002 amended November 20, 1978, effective April 16, 1979, 8 Pa.B. 3551. Immediately preceding text appears at serial page (16015).
Source & verification. Rule text, the Official Note, and the amendment
history are reproduced verbatim from the Pennsylvania Code, Title 231, the official compilation
of rules adopted by the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. Last verified June 30, 2026. ·
Official text
Also known as: discovery agreementstipulation discovery procedure