190.1 Discovery Control Plan Required.
Every case must be governed by a discovery control plan as provided in this Rule. A plaintiff must allege in the first numbered paragraph of the original petition whether discovery is intended to be conducted under Level 1, 2, or 3 of this Rule.
190.2 Discovery Control Plan – Expedited Actions and Divorces Involving $250,000 or Less (Level 1)
190.3 Discovery Control Plan – By Rule (Level 2)
190.4 Discovery Control Plan – By Order (Level 3)
limitation on the time for or amount of discovery set forth in these rules. The discovery limitations of Rule 190.2, if applicable, or otherwise of Rule 190.3 apply unless specifically changed in the discovery control plan ordered by the court. The plan must include:
190.5 Modification of Discovery Control Plan
The court may modify a discovery control plan at any time and must do so when the interest of justice requires. Unless a suit is governed by the expedited actions process in Rule 169, the court must allow additional discovery:
190.6 Certain Types of Discovery Excepted
This rule’s limitations on discovery do not apply to or include discovery conducted under Rule 202 (“Depositions Before Suit or to Investigate Claims”), or Rule 621a (“Discovery and Enforcement of Judgment”). But Rule 202 cannot be used to circumvent the limitations of this rule.
Comment to 1999 change:
1. This rule establishes three tiers of discovery plans and requires that every case be in one at all times. Whether a case is in Level 1 is determined by the pleadings. To be in Level 3, the court must order a specific plan for the case, either on a party’s motion or on the court’s own initiative. The plan may be one agreed to by the parties and submitted as an agreed order. A Level 3 plan may simply adopt Level 1 or Level 2 restrictions. Separate Level 3 plans for phases of the case may be appropriate. Until a Level 3 plan is ordered, a case that is not in Level 1 is in Level 2. The initial pleading required by Rule 190.1 is merely to notify the court and other parties of the plaintiff’s intention; it does not bind the court or other parties. A plaintiff’s failure to state in the initial pleading that the case should be in Level 1 does not waive application of Rule 190.2.
2. Rule 190.2 does not apply to suits for injunctive relief or divorces involving children. The requirement of an affirmative pleading of limited relief (e.g.: “Plaintiff affirmatively pleads that he seeks only monetary relief aggregating $50,000 or less, excluding costs, pre- judgment interest and attorneys’ fees”) does not conflict with other pleading requirements, such as Rule 47 and Tex. Rev. Civ. Stat. Ann. art. 4590i, § 5.01. In a suit to which Rule 190.2 applies, the relief awarded cannot exceed the relief pleaded because the purpose of the rule, unlike Rule 47, is to bind the pleader to a maximum claim. Thus, the rule in Greenhalgh v. Service Lloyds Ins. Co., 787 S.W.2d 938 (Tex. 1990), does not apply.
3. “Discrete subparts” of interrogatories are counted as single interrogatories, but not every separate factual inquiry is a discrete subpart. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 33(a). While not susceptible of precise definition, see Braden v. Downey, 811 S.W.2d 922, 972-928 (Tex. 1991), a “discrete subpart” is, in general, one that calls for information that is not logically or factually related to the primary interrogatory. The number of sets of interrogatories is no longer limited to two.
4. As other rules make clear, unless otherwise ordered or agreed, parties seeking discovery must serve requests sufficiently far in advance of the end of the discovery period that the deadline for responding will be within the discovery period. The court may order a deadline for sending discovery requests in lieu of or in addition to a deadline for completing discovery.
5. Use of forms of discovery other than depositions and interrogatories, such as requests for disclosure, admissions, or production of documents, are not restricted in Levels 1 and 2. But depositions on written questions cannot be used to circumvent the limits on interrogatories.
6. The concept of “side” in Rule 190.3(b)(2) borrows from Rule 233, which governs the allocation of peremptory strikes, and from Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(a)(2). In most cases there are only two sides – plaintiffs and defendants. In complex cases, however, there may be more than two sides, such as when defendants have sued third parties not named by plaintiffs, or when defendants have sued each other. As an example, if P1 and P2 sue D1, D2, and D3, and D1 sues D2 and D3, Ps would together be entitled to depose Ds and others permitted by the rule (i.e., Ds’ experts and persons subject to Ds’ control) for 50 hours, and Ds would together be entitled to depose Ps and others for 50 hours. D1 would also be entitled to depose D2 and D3 and others for 50 hours on matters in controversy among them, and D2 and D3 would together be entitled to depose D1 and others for 50 hours.
7. Any matter listed in Rule 166 may be addressed in an order issued under Rule 190.4. A pretrial order under Rule 166 may be used in individual cases regardless of the discovery level.
8. For purposes of defining discovery periods, “trial” does not include summary judgment.
Comment to 2013 change: Rule 190 is amended to implement section 22.004(h) of the Texas Government Code, which calls for rules to promote the prompt, efficient, and cost-effective resolution of civil actions when the amount in controversy does not exceed $100,000. Rule 190.2 now applies to expedited actions, as defined by Rule 169. Rule 190.2 continues to apply to divorces not involving children in which the value of the marital estate is not more than $50,000, which are otherwise exempt from the expedited actions process. Amended Rule 190.2(b) ends the discovery period 180 days after the date the first discovery request is served; imposes a fifteen limit maximum on interrogatories, requests for production, and requests for admission; and allows for additional disclosures. Although expedited actions are not subject to mandatory additional discovery under amended Rule 190.5, the court may still allow additional discovery if the conditions of Rule 190.5(a) are met.
Comment to 2021 change: Rule 190.2 is amended to implement section 22.004(h-1) of the Texas Government Code. Under amended Rule 190.2, Level 1 discovery limitations now apply to a broader subset of civil actions: expedited actions under Rule 169, which is also amended to implement section 22.004(h-1) of the Texas Government Code, and divorces not involving children in which the value of the marital estate is not more than $250,000. Level 1 limitations are revised to impose a twenty-hour limit on oral depositions. Disclosure requests under Rule 190.2(b)(6) and Rule 194 are now replaced by required disclosures under Rule 194, as amended. The discovery periods under Rules 190.2(b)(1) and 190.3(b)(1) are revised to reference the required disclosures.