Alaska R. Civ. P. 36 (2026)

Rule 36. The frequency or extent of use of the discovery methods otherwise permitted under these rules shall be limited by the court if it determines that: (i) the discovery sought is unreasonably cumulative or duplicative, or is obtainable from some other source that is more convenient, less burdensome, or less expensive; (ii) the party seeking discovery has had ample opportunity by discovery in the action to obtain the information sought; or (iii) the burden or expense of the proposed discovery outweighs its likely benefit, taking into account the needs of the case, the amount in controversy, the parties’ resources, the importance of the issues at stake in the litigation, and the importance of the proposed discovery in resolving the issues. The court may act upon its own initiative after reasonable notice or pursuant to a motion under paragraph (c). (B) A party need not provide discovery of electronically stored information from sources that the party identifies as not reasonably accessible because of undue burden or cost. On motion to compel discovery or for a protective order, the party from whom discovery is sought must show that the information is not reasonably accessible because of undue burden or cost. If that showing is made, the court may nonetheless order discovery from such sources if the requesting party shows good cause, considering the limitations of Rule 26(b)(2)(A). The court may specify conditions for the discovery. (3) Trial Preparation: Materials. Subject to the provisions of subparagraph (b)(4) of this rule, a party may obtain discovery of documents and tangible things otherwise discoverable under subparagraph (b)(1) of this rule and prepared in anticipation of litigation or for trial by or for another party or by or for that other party’s representative (including the other party’s attorney, consultant, surety, indemnitor, insurer, or agent) only upon a showing that the party seeking discovery has substantial need of the materials in the preparation of the party’s case and that the party is unable without undue hardship to obtain the substantial equivalent of the materials by other means. In ordering discovery of such materials when the required showing has been made, the court shall protect against disclosure of the mental impressions, conclusions, opinions or legal theories of an attorney or other representative of a party concerning the litigation. A party may obtain without the required showing a statement concerning the action or its subject matter previously made by that party. Upon request, a person not a party may obtain without the required showing a statement concerning the action or its subject matter previously made by that person. If the request is refused, the person may move for a court order. The provisions of Rule 37(a) (4) apply to the award of expenses incurred in relation to the motion. For purposes of

RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Rule 26 this paragraph, a statement previously made is (A) a written statement signed or otherwise adopted or approved by the person making it, or (B) a stenographic, mechanical, electrical, or other recording, or a transcription thereof, which is a substantially verbatim recital of an oral statement by the person making it and contemporaneously recorded. (4) Trial Preparation: Experts. (A) A party may depose any person who has been identified as an expert whose opinions may be presented at trial. If a report from the expert is required under section (a)(2)(B), the deposition shall not be conducted until after the report is provided. (B) A party may, through interrogatories or by deposition, discover facts known or opinions held by an expert who has been retained or specially employed by another party in anticipation of litigation or preparation for trial and who is not expected to be called as a witness at trial, only as provided in Rule 35(b) or upon a showing of exceptional circumstances under which it is impracticable for the party seeking discovery to obtain facts or opinions on the same subject by other means. (C) Unless manifest injustice would result, (i) the court shall require that the party seeking discovery pay the expert a reasonable fee for time spent in responding to discovery under this subparagraph; and (ii) with respect to discovery obtained under section (b)(4)(B) of this rule the court shall require the party seeking discovery to pay the other party a fair portion of the fees and expenses reasonably incurred by the latter party in obtaining facts and opinions from the expert. (5) Claims of Privilege or Protection of Trial Preparation Materials. When a party withholds information otherwise discoverable under these rules by claiming that it is privileged or subject to protection as trial preparation material, the party shall make the claim expressly and shall describe the nature of the documents, communications, or things not produced or disclosed in a manner that, without revealing information itself privileged or protected, will enable other parties to assess the applicability of the privilege or protection. (c) Protective Orders. Upon motion by a party or by the person from whom discovery is sought, accompanied by a certification that the movant has in good faith conferred or attempted to confer with other affected parties in an effort to resolve the dispute without court action, and for good cause shown, the court in which the action is pending or alternatively, on matters relating to a deposition, the court in the judicial district where the deposition is to be taken may make any order which justice requires to protect a party or person from annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, or undue burden or expense, including one or more of the following: (1) that the disclosure or discovery not be had; (2) that the disclosure or discovery may be had only on specified terms and conditions, including a designation of the time or place; (3) that the discovery may be had only by a method of discovery other than that selected by the party seeking discovery; (4) that certain matters not be inquired into, or that the scope of the disclosure or discovery be limited to certain matters; (5) that discovery be conducted with no one present except persons designated by the court; (6) that a deposition, after being sealed, be opened only by order of the court; (7) that a trade secret or other confidential research, development, or commercial information not be revealed or be revealed only in a designated way; and (8) that the parties simultaneously file specified documents or information enclosed in sealed envelopes to be opened as directed by the court. If the motion for a protective order is denied in whole or in part, the court may, on such terms and conditions as are just, order that any party or other person provide or permit discovery. The provisions of Rule 37(a)(4) apply to the award of expenses incurred in relation to the motion. (d) Timing and Sequence of Discovery. (1) Timing of Discovery—Non-Exempted Actions. In an action in which disclosure is required under Rule 26(a), a party may serve up to ten of the thirty interrogatories allowed under Rule 33(a) at the times allowed by section (d)(2)(C) of this rule. Otherwise, except by order of the court or agreement of the parties, a party may not seek discovery from any source before the parties have met and conferred as required by paragraph (f). (2) Timing of Discovery—Exempted Actions. In actions exempted from disclosure under Rule 26(a), discovery may take place as follows: (A) For depositions upon oral examination under Civil Rule 30, a defendant may take depositions at any time after commencement of the action. The plaintiff must obtain leave of court if the plaintiff seeks to take a deposition prior to the expiration of 30 days after service of the summons and complaint upon any defendant or service under Rule 4(e) if authorized, except that leave is not required (i) if a defendant has served a notice of taking deposition or otherwise sought discovery, or (ii) the plaintiff seeks to take the deposition under Civil Rule 30(a)(2)(C). (B) For depositions upon written questions under Civil Rule 31, a party may serve questions at any time after commencement of the action. (C) For interrogatories, requests for production, and requests for admission under Civil Rules 33, 34, and 36, discovery requests may be served upon the plaintiff at any time after the commencement of the action, and upon any other party with or after service of the summons and complaint upon that party. (3) Sequence of Discovery. Unless the court upon motion, for the convenience of parties and witnesses and in the interests of justice, orders otherwise, methods of discovery may be used in any sequence, and the fact that a party is conducting discovery, whether by deposition or otherwise, shall not operate to delay any other party’s discovery. (e) Supplementation of Disclosures and Responses. A party who has made a disclosure under paragraph (a) or Civil Rule 26.1(b) or responded to a request for discovery with a disclosure or response is under a duty to supplement or correct the disclosure or response to include information thereafter

acquired if ordered by the court or in the following circumstances: (1) A party is under a duty to supplement at appropriate intervals its disclosures under paragraph (a) if the party learns that in some material respect the information disclosed is incomplete or incorrect and if the additional or corrective information has not otherwise been made known to the other parties during the discovery process or in writing. With respect to testimony of an expert from whom a report is required under subdivision (a)(2)(B) the duty extends both to information contained in the report and to information provided through a deposition of the expert. (2) A party is under a duty seasonably to amend a prior response to an interrogatory, request for production, or request for admission if the party learns that the response is in some material respect incomplete or incorrect and if the additional or corrective information has not otherwise been made known to the other parties during the discovery process or in writing. (f) Meeting of Parties; Planning for Discovery and Alternative Dispute Resolution. Except when otherwise ordered and except in actions exempted from disclosure under Rule 26(a), the parties shall, as soon as practicable and in any event at least 14 days before a scheduling conference is held or a scheduling order is due under Rule 16(b), meet to discuss the nature and basis of their claims and defenses and the possibilities for a prompt settlement or resolution of the case, including whether an alternative dispute resolution procedure is appropriate, to make or arrange for the disclosures required by subparagraph (a)(1), and to develop a proposed discovery plan and a proposed alternative dispute resolution plan. The plan shall indicate the parties’ views and proposals concerning: (1) what changes should be made in the timing or form of disclosures under paragraph (a), including a statement as to when the disclosures under subparagraph (a)(1) were made or will be made and what are appropriate intervals for supplementation of disclosure under Rule 26(e)(1); (2) the subjects on which discovery may be needed, when discovery should be completed, and whether discovery should be conducted in phases or be limited to or focused upon particular issues; (3) disclosure or discovery of electronically stored information, including the form or forms in which it should be produced; (4) what changes should be made in the limitations on discovery imposed under these rules and what other limitations should be imposed; (5) the plan for alternative dispute resolution, including its timing, the method of selecting a mediator, early neutral evaluator, or arbitrator, or an explanation of why alternative dispute resolution is inappropriate; (6) whether a scheduling conference is unnecessary; and (7) any other orders that should be entered by the court under paragraph (c) or under Rule 16(b) and (c). The attorneys of record and all unrepresented parties that have appeared in the case are jointly responsible for arranging and being present or represented at the meeting, for attempting in good faith to agree on the proposed discovery plan, and for submitting to the court within 10 days after the meeting a written report outlining the plan. (g) [Applicable to cases filed on or after August 7, 1997.] Limited Discovery; Expedited Calendaring. In a civil action for personal injury or property damage involving less than $100,000 in claims, the parties shall limit discovery to that allowed under District Court Civil Rule 1(a)(1) and shall avail themselves of the expedited calendaring procedures allowed under District Court Civil Rule 4. (Adopted by SCO 5 October 9, 1959; amended by SCO 49 effective January 1, 1963; by SCO 149 dated December 27, 1971; by SCO 158 effective February 15, 1973; by Amendment No. 2 to SCO 158 dated July 30, 1973; by SCO 336 effective January 1, 1979; by SCO 1026 effective July 15, 1990; by SCO 1153 effective July 15, 1994; by SCO 1172 effective July 15, 1995; by SCO 1266 effective July 15, 1997; by SCO 1281 effective August 7, 1997; by SCO 1318 effective July 15, 1998; by SCO 1325 effective July 15, 1998; by SCO 1341 effective September 10, 1998; by SCO 1569 effective October 15, 2005; by SCO 1682 effective April 15, 2009; by SCO 1834 effective October 15, 2014; by SCO 1950 nunc pro tunc July 20, 2019; by SCO 2024 effective June 26, 2024; and by SCO 2033 effective January 1, 2025) Note to SCO 1281: Paragraph (g) of this rule was added by ch. 26, sec. 40, SLA 1997. According to sec. 55 of the Act, the amendment to Civil Rule 26 applies “to all causes of action accruing on or after the effective date of this Act.” The amendment to Rule 26 adopted by paragraph 1 of this order applies to all cases filed on or after August 7, 1997. See paragraph 17 of this order. The change is adopted for the sole reason that the legislature has mandated the amendment. Note: Ch. 26, sec. 10, SLA 1997 repeals and reenacts AS 09.17.020 concerning punitive damages. New AS 09.17.020(e) prohibits parties from conducting discovery relevant to the amount of punitive damages until after the fact finder has determined that an award of punitive damages is allowed. This provision applies to causes of action accruing on or after August 7, 1997. See ch. 26, sec. 55, SLA 1997. According to sec. 48 of the Act, new AS 09.17.020(e) has the effect of amending Civil Rule 26 by limiting discovery in certain actions. Note: Section 2 of chapter 95 SLA 1998 amends AS 09.19.050 to state that the automatic disclosure provisions of Civil Rule 26 do not apply in prisoner litigation against the state. According to section 13 of the act, this amendment has the effect of changing Civil Rule 26 “by providing that the automatic disclosure provisions of the rule do not apply to litigation against the state brought by prisoners.” Note to SCO 1647: The supreme court has approved certain procedures for Anchorage cases that vary from those specified in this rule. Civil Rule 26(a)(1) sets out a procedure to be used “[e]xcept to the extent otherwise directed by order

RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Rule 26.1 or rule,” and sets a timeline for disclosures “[u]nless otherwise directed by the court.” Civil Rule 26(f) also sets out a procedure to be sued “except when otherwise ordered.” In Anchorage, Administrative Order 3AO-03-04 (Amended) applies to modify the procedures set out in subdivisions (a)(1) and (f). That Order, commonly referred to as the Anchorage Uniform Pretrial Order, was issued and adopted according to the provisions of Administrative Rule 46, and is available on the court system’s website at: http://www.courts.alaska.gov/main/orders-cr16-26.htm. Note: Chapter 12, SLA 2019 (HB 78) enacted a number of changes relating to the insurance code. According to section 8 of the Act, provisions in sections 3 (enacting AS 21.22.117) and 5 (amending AS 21.22.120) of the Act have the effect of changing Civil Rule 26, effective July 20, 2019, by prohibiting the discovery of evidence in the possession or control of the National Association of Insurance Commissioners relating to insurance holding companies and insurance holding company systems. Note: Chapter 39, SLA 2024 (SB 134) enacted data security standards for Alaska-licensed insurance companies and procedures for investigation and notification of a cybersecurity event. According to section 4 of the Act, AS 21.23.290(a)(3), enacted by section 1 of the Act, has the effect of changing Rule 26, Alaska Rules of Civil Procedure, by prohibiting discovery of evidence in the possession or control of the division of insurance that is provided by a licensee or an employee or agent acting on behalf of a licensee under AS 21.23.260(f) or 21.23.280(b)(2) – (5), (8), (10), or (11) or that is obtained by the director in an investigation or examination under AS 21.23.310.