Marketplace Create skill Sign in

California Discovery Verification

Drafts California Superior Court discovery verification pages under CCP §§ 2030.250 and 2031.250 with proper CCP § 2015.5 perjury declarations. Trigger when the user needs a verification page for interrogatory or inspection/RPD responses, mentions California discovery verification, party vs. attorney signing, information-and-belief clauses, or fixing unverified responses. CA Superior Court only — not federal.

ID: deb4001c-7531-4c21-9ffc-b37c149afbd1 Version: 0.1.0 License: Apache-2.0 Author: CaseMark Language: en Added: 2026-06-15
⬇ Download

California Discovery Verification

Produces correctly formatted CA verification pages with proper signer capacity, knowledge basis, and CCP § 2015.5 perjury declaration. Unverified responses are treated as no response — the responding party waives objections and faces motions to compel (Appleton v. Superior Court (1988) 206 Cal.App.3d 632 [VERIFY]).

Quick Start

  1. Gather intake details (see Pre-Draft Intake)
  2. Select verification type by discovery device
  3. Select knowledge basis clause
  4. Draft verification from template
  5. Run quality audit
  6. Confirm alignment with user

Pre-Draft Intake

Gather before drafting (apply labeled defaults if user says "use defaults" or "just draft"):

Field Details Default
Discovery device Interrogatories (Form/Special) or inspection demand/RPD Interrogatory
Exact response title Must match verbatim on verification —
Caption info Court name, case number, party names —
Responding party type Individual or entity (corp, LLC, partnership) Individual
Signer identity Legal name, title/role, authority basis (entities) —
Knowledge basis Personal knowledge only, or information and belief Info & belief
Execution details Date, city, state —

Do not draft verification for responses that have not been finalized.

Step 1: Select Verification Type

Device Statute
Interrogatories (Form/Special) CCP § 2030.250
Inspection demand / RPD CCP § 2031.250
Federal court Stop — use FRCP 33/34 + 28 U.S.C. § 1746 [VERIFY]

Step 2: Select Knowledge Basis

  • Personal knowledge only: "The matters stated in the foregoing responses are true of my own knowledge."
  • Information and belief (signer relied on records, employees, or collected info): "The matters stated in the foregoing responses are true of my own knowledge, except as to those matters stated on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe them to be true."

Step 3: Draft Verification

Individual Template

[CAPTION BLOCK]

VERIFICATION OF [PARTY NAME] TO [EXACT RESPONSE TITLE]

I am the [plaintiff/defendant] in this action. I have read the foregoing responses and know the contents thereof.
[KNOWLEDGE BASIS CLAUSE]

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed on [DATE], at [CITY], [STATE].

___________________________
[SIGNER NAME]
[Plaintiff/Defendant]

Entity Template

[CAPTION BLOCK]

VERIFICATION OF [ENTITY NAME] TO [EXACT RESPONSE TITLE]

I am the [TITLE] of [ENTITY NAME], a party to this action, and am authorized to make this verification for and on its behalf. I have read the foregoing responses and know the contents thereof.
[KNOWLEDGE BASIS CLAUSE]
[OPTIONAL: "I am informed by the employees and records of [ENTITY NAME] regarding the matters stated."]

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed on [DATE], at [CITY], [STATE].

[ENTITY NAME]
By: _______________________
    [SIGNER NAME]
    Its: [TITLE]

Templates apply to both interrogatory and inspection/RPD verifications — select the matching type from Step 1.

Post-Draft Alignment

After delivering, confirm with the user:

  1. Verification title matches response document title exactly
  2. Signer has proper authority (especially for entities)
  3. Knowledge basis clause is appropriate
  4. Execution location is correct (out-of-state may need adjustment)

Quality Audit

Before finalizing, verify all of the following:

  • [ ] Verification title matches response title verbatim
  • [ ] Signer capacity stated; entity authorization language included
  • [ ] CCP § 2015.5 perjury language verbatim: "under the laws of the State of California"
  • [ ] Execution date and city/state present
  • [ ] Signature block includes name and capacity
  • [ ] Objections not verified (attorney signs for objections)
  • [ ] Knowledge basis clause matches actual basis of responses
  • [ ] Federal court not using CCP form
  • [ ] No attorney signature where party signature required

Pitfalls

  • Title mismatch between verification and response invites motions to compel
  • Attorney-signed verifications invalid except narrow CCP § 446 circumstances [VERIFY]
  • "Personal knowledge" clause wrong if signer relied on records — use information-and-belief
  • Never verify legal objections — attorney signs the response document for those
  • Omitting "under the laws of the State of California" from perjury declaration is a fatal defect
  • No notarization unless court order or client policy requires it
  • Perjury exposure for false verifications (Cal. Penal Code § 118) [VERIFY]
  • All case citations must be verified or flagged [VERIFY] — do not invent case law
  • Attorney review required — all output must be reviewed by supervising counsel before signature or service

Comments

Loading…

Related Skills

United States flagUnited States · litigation

Writ of Execution

Drafts writs of execution and supporting levy instructions for post-judgment enforcement of money judgments. Covers application for writ, interest ca…

CaseMark
United States flagUnited States · litigation

Deposition Witness Preparation

Runs ethics-compliant deposition witness-prep workflows for US civil litigation. Use when preparing party, fact, expert, or 30(b)(6) witnesses for de…

CaseMark
United States flagUnited States · litigation

Witness Preparation Ethics Boundaries

Evaluates witness preparation activities for ethical compliance under ABA Formal Opinion 508 and Model Rules 3.3, 3.4, 8.4. Distinguishes permissible…

CaseMark
United States flagUnited States · litigation

Deposition Witness Preparation

Guides attorneys through deposition witness preparation using a two-session model with document review, practice examination, and day-of logistics. C…

CaseMark
United States flagUnited States · litigation

Spokane County Superior Court — Venue Skill

Use when handling a Spokane County, Washington Superior Court case — civil practice at the **Spokane County Courthouse** (1116 West Broadway Avenue, …

codearranger