Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.280

General Provisions Governing Discovery

sha256 a737ee3a529d18e9120faf46535ef2a2… · retrieved 7/11/2026, 11:08:24 AM · The Florida Bar consolidated ed. eff. 04-01-2026 · verified 7/11/2026 by founder-directive-2026-07-11

RULE 1.280. 	GENERAL PROVISIONS GOVERNING DISCOVERY
(a) 	Initial Discovery Disclosure.
(1) 	In General. Except as exempted by subdivision (a)(2)
or as ordered by the court, a party must, without awaiting a
discovery request, provide to the other parties the following initial
discovery disclosures unless privileged or protected from disclosure:

(A) 	the name and, if known, the address,
telephone number, and e-mail address of each individual likely to
have discoverable information—along with the subjects of that
information—that the disclosing party may use to support its
claims or defenses, unless the use would be solely for
impeachment;
(B) 	a copy—or a description by category and
location—of all documents, electronically stored information, and
tangible things that the disclosing party has in its possession,
custody, or control (or, if not in the disclosing party’s possession,
custody, or control, a description by category and location of such
information) and may use to support its claims or defenses, unless
the use would be solely for impeachment;
(C) 	a computation for each category of damages
claimed by the disclosing party and a copy of the documents or
other evidentiary material, unless privileged or protected from
disclosure, on which each computation is based, including
materials bearing on the nature and extent of injuries suffered;
provided that a party is not required to provide computations as to
noneconomic damages, but the party must identify categories of
damages claimed and provide supporting documents; and
(D) 	a copy of any insurance policy or agreement
under which an insurance business may be liable to satisfy all or
part of a possible judgment in the action or to indemnify or
reimburse for payments made to satisfy the judgment.
(2) 	Proceedings Exempt from Initial Discovery Disclosure.
Unless ordered by the court, actions and claims listed in rule
1.200(a) are exempt from initial discovery disclosure.
(3) 	Time for Initial Discovery Disclosures. A party must
make the initial discovery disclosures required by this rule within
60 days after the service of the complaint or joinder, unless a
different time is set by court order.
(4) 	Basis for Initial Discovery Disclosure; Unacceptable
Excuses; Objections. A party must make its initial discovery

disclosures based on the information then reasonably available to
it. A party is not excused from making its initial discovery
disclosures because it has not fully investigated the case or because
it challenges the sufficiency of another party’s initial discovery
disclosures or because another party has not made its initial
discovery disclosures. A party who formally objects to providing
certain information is not excused from making all other initial
discovery disclosures required by this rule in a timely manner.
(b) 	Discovery Methods. Parties may obtain discovery by 1
or more of the following methods: depositions on oral examination
or written questions; written interrogatories; production of
documents or things or permission to enter on land or other
property for inspection and other purposes; physical and mental
examinations; and requests for admission. Unless the court orders
otherwise and under subdivision (d), the frequency of use of these
methods is not limited, except as provided in rules 1.200, 1.340,
and 1.370.
(c) 	Scope of Discovery. Unless otherwise limited by court
order, the scope of discovery is as follows:
(1) 	In General. Parties may obtain discovery regarding
any nonprivileged matter that is relevant to any party’s claim or
defense and proportional to the needs of the case, considering the
importance of the issues at stake in the action, the amount in
controversy, the parties’ relative access to relevant information, the
parties’ resources, the importance of the discovery in resolving the
issues, and whether the burden or expense of the proposed
discovery outweighs its likely benefit. Information within this scope
of discovery need not be admissible in evidence to be discoverable.
(2) 	Indemnity Agreements. A party may obtain discovery
of the existence and contents of any agreement under which any
person may be liable to satisfy part or all of a judgment that may be
entered in the action or to indemnify or to reimburse a party for
payments made to satisfy the judgment. Information concerning the
agreement is not admissible in evidence at trial by reason of
disclosure.

(3) 	Electronically Stored Information. A party may obtain
discovery of electronically stored information under these rules.
(4) 	Trial Preparation; Materials. Subject to the
provisions of subdivision (c)(5), a party may obtain discovery of
documents and tangible things otherwise discoverable under
subdivision (c)(1) and prepared in anticipation of litigation or for
trial by or for another party or by or for that party’s representative,
including that party’s attorney, consultant, surety, indemnitor,
insurer, or agent, only on a showing that the party seeking
discovery has need of the materials in the preparation of the case
and is unable without undue hardship to obtain the substantial
equivalent of the materials by other means. In ordering discovery of
the materials when the required showing has been made, the court
must protect against disclosure of the mental impressions,
conclusions, opinions, or legal theories of an attorney or other
representative of a party concerning the litigation. Without the
required showing a party may obtain a copy of a statement
concerning the action or its subject matter previously made by that
party. On request without the required showing a person not a
party may obtain a copy of a statement concerning the action or its
subject matter previously made by that person. If the request is
refused, the person may move for an order to obtain a copy. The
provisions of rule 1.380(a)(4) apply to the award of expenses
incurred as a result of making the motion. For purposes of this
paragraph, a statement previously made is a written statement
signed or otherwise adopted or approved by the person making it, or
a stenographic, mechanical, electrical, or other recording or
transcription of it that is a substantially verbatim recital of an oral
statement by the person making it and contemporaneously
recorded.
(5) 	Trial Preparation; Experts. Discovery of facts known
and opinions held by experts, otherwise discoverable under the
provisions of subdivision (c)(1) and acquired or developed in
anticipation of litigation or for trial, may be obtained only as
follows:

(A) 	(i) 	By interrogatories a party may require
any other party to identify each person whom the other party
expects to call as an expert witness at trial and to state the subject
matter on which the expert is expected to testify, and to state the
substance of the facts and opinions to which the expert is expected
to testify and a summary of the grounds for each opinion.
(ii) 	Any person disclosed by interrogatories
or otherwise as a person expected to be called as an expert witness
at trial may be deposed in accordance with rule 1.390 without
motion or order of court.
(iii) 	A party may obtain the following
discovery regarding any person disclosed by interrogatories or
otherwise as a person expected to be called as an expert witness at
trial:
1. 	The scope of employment in the
pending case and the compensation for such service.
2. 	The expert’s general litigation
experience, including the percentage of work performed for plaintiffs
and defendants.
3. 	The identity of other cases, within a
reasonable time period, in which the expert has testified by
deposition or at trial.
4. 	An approximation of the portion of
the expert’s involvement as an expert witness, which may be based
on the number of hours, percentage of hours, or percentage of
earned income derived from serving as an expert witness; however,
the expert will not be required to disclose the expert’s earnings as
an expert witness or income derived from other services.
An expert may be required to produce financial and business
records only under the most unusual or compelling circumstances
and may not be compelled to compile or produce nonexistent
documents. On motion, the court may order further discovery by
other means, subject to such restrictions as to scope and other

provisions under subdivision (c)(5)(C) concerning fees and expenses
as the court may deem appropriate.
(B) 	A party may 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 1.360(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, the
court will require that the party seeking discovery pay the expert a
reasonable fee for time spent in responding to discovery under
subdivisions (c)(5)(A) and (c)(5)(B); and concerning discovery from
an expert obtained under subdivision (c)(5)(A) the court may
require, and concerning discovery obtained under subdivision
(c)(5)(B) will require, the party seeking discovery to pay the other
party a fair part of the fees and expenses reasonably incurred by
the latter party in obtaining facts and opinions from the expert.
(D) 	As used in these rules an expert witness is
defined in rule 1.390(a).
(6) 	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 must
make the claim expressly and must 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.
(d) 	Protective Orders. On motion by a party or by the
person from whom discovery is sought, and for good cause shown,
the court in which the action is pending may make any order to
protect a party or person from annoyance, embarrassment,

oppression, or undue burden or expense that justice requires,
including 1 or more of the following:
(1) 	that the discovery not be had;
(2) 	that the discovery may be had only on specified
terms and conditions, including a designation of the time or place
or the allocation of expenses;
(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 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 disclosed or be
disclosed 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 person provide or permit discovery. The provisions of rule
1.380(a)(4) apply to the award of expenses incurred in relation to
the motion.
(e) 	Limitations on Discovery of Electronically Stored
Information.
(1) 	A person may object to discovery of electronically
stored information from sources that the person identifies as not
reasonably accessible because of burden or cost. On motion to

compel discovery or for a protective order, the person from whom
discovery is sought must show that the information sought or the
format requested is not reasonably accessible because of undue
burden or cost. If that showing is made, the court may nonetheless
order the discovery from such sources or in such formats if the
requesting party shows good cause. The court may specify
conditions of the discovery, including ordering that some or all of
the expenses incurred by the person from whom discovery is sought
be paid by the party seeking the discovery.
(2) 	In determining any motion involving discovery of
electronically stored information, the court must limit the frequency
or extent of discovery otherwise allowed by these rules if it
determines that:
(A) 	the discovery sought is unreasonably
cumulative or duplicative, or can be obtained from another source
or in another manner that is more convenient, less burdensome, or
less expensive; or
(B) 	the burden or expense of the discovery
outweighs its likely benefit, considering the needs of the case, the
amount in controversy, the parties’ resources, the importance of the
issues at stake in the action, and the importance of the discovery in
resolving the issues.
(f) 	Timing and Sequence of Discovery.
(1) 	Timing. A party may not seek discovery from any
source before that party’s initial disclosures are served on the other
party, except when authorized by stipulation or by court order.
(2) 	Sequence. Except as provided in subdivision (c)(5),
or unless the parties stipulate or the court 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, must not delay any other party’s discovery.
(g) 	Supplementing of Responses. A party who has made a
disclosure under this rule or who has responded to an

interrogatory, a request for production, or a request for admission
must supplement or correct its disclosure or response:
(1) 	in a timely manner if the party learns that in some
material respect the disclosure or response 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; or
(2) 	as ordered by the court.
(h) 	Court Filing of Documents and Discovery. Information
obtained during discovery may not be filed with the court until such
time as it is filed for good cause. The requirement of good cause is
satisfied only when the filing of the information is allowed or
required by another applicable rule of procedure or by court order.
All filings of discovery documents must comply with Florida Rule of
General Practice and Judicial Administration 2.425. The court has
the authority to impose sanctions for violation of this rule.
(i) 	Apex Doctrine. A current or former high-level
government or corporate officer may seek an order preventing the
officer from being subject to a deposition. The motion, whether by a
party or by the person of whom the deposition is sought, must be
accompanied by an affidavit or declaration of the officer explaining
that the officer lacks unique, personal knowledge of the issues
being litigated. If the officer meets this burden of production, the
court shall issue an order preventing the deposition, unless the
party seeking the deposition demonstrates that it has exhausted
other discovery, that such discovery is inadequate, and that the
officer has unique, personal knowledge of discoverable information.
The court may vacate or modify the order if, after additional
discovery, the party seeking the deposition can meet its burden of
persuasion under this rule. The burden to persuade the court that
the officer is high-level for purposes of this rule lies with the person
or party opposing the deposition.
(j) 	Form of Responses to Written Discovery Requests.
When responding to requests for production served under rule
1.310(b)(5), written deposition questions served under rule 1.320,

interrogatories served under rule 1.340, requests for production or
inspection served under rule 1.350, requests for production of
documents or things without deposition served under rule 1.351,
requests for admissions served under rule 1.370, or requests for the
production of documentary evidence served under rule 1.410(c), the
responding party must state each deposition question,
interrogatory, or discovery request in full as numbered, followed by
the answer, objection, or other response.
(k) 	Signing Disclosures and Discovery Requests;
Responses; and Objections. Every initial discovery disclosure
under subdivision (a) of this rule and every discovery request,
response, or objection made by a party represented by an attorney
must be signed by at least 1 attorney of record and must include
the attorney’s address, e-mail address, and telephone number. A
self-represented litigant must sign the request, response, or
objection and must include the self-represented litigant’s address,
e-mail address, and telephone number. By signing, an attorney or
self-represented litigant certifies that to the best of the person’s
knowledge, information, and belief formed after a reasonable
inquiry:
(1) 	with respect to a disclosure, it is complete and
correct as of the time it is made; and
(2) 	with respect to a discovery request, response, or
objection, it is:
(A) 	consistent with these rules and warranted by
existing law or a good faith argument for the extension,
modification, or reversal of existing law;
(B) 	not interposed for any improper purpose, such
as to harass or to cause unnecessary delay or needless increase in
the cost of litigation; and
(C) 	not unreasonable or unduly burdensome or
expensive, given the needs of the case, the discovery already had in
the case, the amount in controversy, and the importance of the
issues at stake in the litigation.

No party has a duty to act on an unsigned disclosure, request,
response, or objection until it is signed. If a certification violates
this rule without substantial justification, the court, on motion or
on its own, must impose an appropriate sanction on the signer, the
party on whose behalf the signer was acting, or both. The sanction
may include an order to pay the reasonable expenses, including
attorney’s fees, caused by the violation.
Committee Notes
1972 Amendment. The rule is derived from Federal Rule of
Civil Procedure 26 as amended in 1970. Subdivisions (a), (b)(2), and
(b)(3) are new. Subdivision (c) contains material from former rule
1.310(b). Subdivisions (d) and (e) are new, but the latter is similar
to former rule 1.340(d). Significant changes are made in discovery
from experts. The general rearrangement of the discovery rule is
more logical and is the result of 35 years of experience under the
federal rules.
1988 Amendment. Subdivision (b)(2) has been added to
enable discovery of the existence and contents of indemnity
agreements and is the result of the enactment of sections 627.7262
and 627.7264, Florida Statutes, proscribing the joinder of insurers
but providing for disclosure. This rule is derived from Federal Rule
of Civil Procedure 26(b)(2). Subdivisions (b)(2) and (b)(3) have been
redesignated as (b)(3) and (b)(4) respectively.
The purpose of the amendment to subdivision (b)(3)(A)
(renumbered (b)(4)(A)) is to allow, without leave of court, the
depositions of experts who have been disclosed as expected to be
used at trial. The purpose of subdivision (b)(4)(D) is to define the
term “expert” as used in these rules.
1996 Amendment. The amendments to subdivision (b)(4)(A)
are derived from the Supreme Court’s decision in Elkins v. Syken,
672 So. 2d 517 (Fla. 1996). They are intended to avoid annoyance,
embarrassment, and undue expense while still permitting the
adverse party to obtain relevant information regarding the potential
bias or interest of the expert witness.

Subdivision (b)(5) is added and is derived from Federal Rule of
Civil Procedure 26(b)(5) (1993).
2011 Amendment. Subdivision (f) is added to ensure that
information obtained during discovery is not filed with the court
unless there is good cause for the documents to be filed, and that
information obtained during discovery that includes certain private
information shall not be filed with the court unless the private
information is redacted as required by Florida Rule of Judicial
Administration 2.425.
2012 Amendment. Subdivisions (b)(3) and (d) are added to
address discovery of electronically stored information.
The parties should consider conferring with one another at the
earliest practical opportunity to discuss the reasonable scope of
preservation and production of electronically stored information.
These issues may also be addressed by means of a rule 1.200 or
rule 1.201 case management conference.
Under the good cause test in subdivision (d)(1), the court
should balance the costs and burden of the requested discovery,
including the potential for disruption of operations or corruption of
the electronic devices or systems from which discovery is sought,
against the relevance of the information and the requesting party’s
need for that information. Under the proportionality and
reasonableness factors set out in subdivision (d)(2), the court must
limit the frequency or extent of discovery if it determines that the
discovery sought is excessive in relation to the factors listed.
In evaluating the good cause or proportionality tests, the court
may find its task complicated if the parties know little about what
information the sources at issue contain, whether the information
sought is relevant, or how valuable it may be to the litigation. If
appropriate, the court may direct the parties to develop the record
further by engaging in focused discovery, including sampling of the
sources, to learn more about what electronically stored information
may be contained in those sources, what costs and burdens are
involved in retrieving, reviewing, and producing the information,
and how valuable the information sought may be to the litigation in

light of the availability of information from other sources or
methods of discovery, and in light of the parties’ resources and the
issues at stake in the litigation.
Court Commentary
2000 Amendment. Allstate Insurance Co. v. Boecher, 733 So.
2d 993, 999 (Fla. 1999), clarifies that subdivision (b)(4)(A)(iii) is not
intended “to place a blanket bar on discovery from parties about
information they have in their possession about an expert,
including the party’s financial relationship with the expert.”
2024 Amendment. The scope of discovery in subdivision (c)(1)
is amended to adopt almost all the text of Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 26(b)(1) and is to be construed and applied in accordance
with the federal proportionality standard.

Verbatim from the official publication; the only normalization is removal of the publisher's page headers. Verify against the official source for filing-critical use — court publications change without notice.