IN THE MATTER OF THE AMENDMENT
OF SDCL 15-6-26(e) RULE 06-16
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

    A hearing was held on February 16, 2006, at Pierre, South Dakota, relating to the amendment of SDCL 15-6-26(e), and the Court having considered the proposed amendment, the correspondence and oral presentations relating thereto and being fully advised in the premises, now, therefore, it is

    ORDERED that SDCL 15-6-26(e) be and it is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows:

     15-6-26(e).   Supplementation of responses. A party who has responded to a request for discovery with a response that was complete when made is under no a duty to supplement his or correct the response to include information thereafter acquired, except as follows if ordered by the court or in the following circumstances:

             (1)      A party is under a duty seasonably to supplement his at appropriate intervals the party's response with respect to any question directly addressed to (A) the identity and location of persons having knowledge of discoverable matters, and (B) the identity of each person expected to be called as an expert witness at trial, the subject matter on which he is expected to testify, and the substance of his testimony to a discovery request authorized under subdivision (a) if the party learns that in some material respect the 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. With respect to testimony of an expert the duty extends to information contained in any expert report, discovery response concerning expert's opinions and any deposition of the expert.

---

             (2)      A party is under a duty seasonably to amend a prior response if he obtains information upon the basis of which (A) he knows that the response was incorrect when made, or (B) he knows that the response though correct when made is no longer true and the circumstances are such that a failure to amend the response is in substance a knowing concealment 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.

             (3)      A duty to supplement responses may be imposed by order of the court, agreement of the parties, or at any time prior to trial through new requests for supplementation of prior responses.

    IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this rule shall become effective July 1, 2006.

    DATED at Pierre, South Dakota, this 17th day of March 2006.

_______________