In the courts of the State of California, disclosure is governed by the Civil Discovery Act of 1986 (Title 4 (Sections 2016-2036) of the Code of Civil Procedure), as subsequently amended.  A significant number of Decisions of the Court of Appeal have interpreted and interpreted the provisions of the Act. Part of the pre-litigation dispute where each party requests relevant information and documents from the other party to “discover” relevant facts. In general, detection devices include filings, intergatories, regulatory filings, document production requirements, and inspection requests. In 1938, the enactment of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP) (under the Rules Enabling Act) created for the first time a comprehensive system of investigation in the United States. Federal Courts.  The FRCP authorized full disclosure of “any matter that is not privileged and that is relevant to the subject matter of the current lawsuit, whether it relates to the claim or defense of either party.”  Due to the influence of progressive law professor Edson R. Sunderland, a strong proponent of large-scale discovery, the FRCP specifically approved the full family of discovery methods familiar to American litigants today.  What made the FRCP so revolutionary was that while many state governments regularly authorized one or more methods of investigation, no state or federal government ever tried to allow litigants to use them all, as Sunderland openly admitted before the advisory committee that drafted the FRCP.  As a result, the United States has the broadest detection system in the world.   A party who files an application for a court disclosure order may be required to bear or anticipate the costs incurred in obtaining the disclosure if it is granted. If the party is ultimately successful, the court may require that the costs be borne by the defendant. The investigation process takes place after a lawsuit has been filed and strict deadlines must be followed.
The rules of investigation are set by the state`s rules of evidence. The usual forms of discovery are general discovery and specific discovery, as it is unlikely that the parties involved will enter into agreements on what should be disclosed. This is reflected in the current investigation rules, which focus on timeliness, service rules, the appropriate list of documents, and the rights rules set out in Part 31 of the CPP and RFP 31B. Once a party properly conducts the general investigation in accordance with the investigation rules and procedures, the documents are considered findable, i.e. the documents can be consulted. Inspection capacity refers to procedural and legal elements: the first concerns the bureaucratic submission of documents; The latter concerns the relevance criterion [Peruvian guano vs Financiaso Compagneiage (1881) 10 EEE 125] and the binding test. In the event of professional misconduct, the investigation process gives both the plaintiff and the defendant the opportunity to request and obtain relevant information related to the claim. During this process: The use of discovery has been criticized to favor the wealthiest party in a legal battle by allowing the parties to deprive each other of financial resources in a war of attrition.
For example, requests for information may be made, the execution of which is potentially costly and time-consuming for the other party; respond to a request for an investigation containing thousands of documents of questionable relevance to the case;  apply for protection orders to prevent the testimony of key witnesses; and take other measures that increase the difficulty and cost of discovery. In 1983, the Civil Settlements Advisory Committee attached a committee note to section 26 of the FRCP, warning federal courts to “prevent the use of the findings to wage a war of attrition or as a means of forcing a party, whether financially weak or rich,” and then had to repeat and emphasize exactly the same text in the committee`s 2015 memo.  Requests for disclosure request basic information about the party and the allegations or allegations made by the party. Examples include the legal names of the parties to the lawsuit, the legal theories and factual basis of the party`s claims or defense, the names and contact information of persons with relevant information about the case. For more information about other rules that apply to this type of detection, see Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 194. WRITTEN DISCOVERY Under the aegis of “written discovery” we find: n. the entire efforts of a party to a trial and his lawyers, pre-trial information through requests for submission of documents, testimony of parties and potential witnesses, written interrogations (questions and answers written under oath), written requests for factual confessions, Scene investigation and queries and queries, which are used to enforce discovery rights. The theory of the right to global disclosure of evidence states that all parties will go to court with as much knowledge as possible and that neither party should be able to keep secrets of the other (with the exception of constitutional protection against self-incrimination). Often, much of the battle between the two sides takes place in a costume during the discovery period.
(See: Testimonies, interrogations) Discovery, at common law, is a pre-litigation procedure in which either party can obtain evidence from the other party or parties through civil procedure law through investigative arrangements such as interrogations, requests for submission of documents, applications for admission and testimony.  Disclosure may be obtained from non-parties through subpoenas.