In a lawsuit, to meet and confer means to have a genuine, good-faith conversation with the opposing side, usually attorney to attorney, trying to resolve a specific dispute before asking the judge to rule on it. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37 makes this a prerequisite for most discovery motions, and many local court rules and scheduling orders extend the requirement to other motions as well.1Cornell Law School. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 37 Skip it and the judge can deny your motion outright, no matter how strong the underlying argument is.
When the Requirement Applies
Discovery Motions
The most common trigger is a discovery dispute. If you believe the other side’s document production is incomplete, their interrogatory answers are evasive, or they’re wrongly withholding materials, you cannot go straight to a motion to compel. Rule 37 requires the moving party to certify that they “in good faith conferred or attempted to confer” with the opposing side first.1Cornell Law School. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 37 The requirement reaches motions involving initial disclosures, interrogatories, document production, and deposition-related relief.
The Rule 26(f) Planning Conference
Before discovery opens, Rule 26(f) requires its own conference. The parties must meet at least 21 days before the court’s scheduling conference to discuss the nature of the case, early settlement possibilities, required disclosures, and a proposed discovery plan covering timing, scope, and limitations. A written report follows within 14 days.2U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. Rule 26 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure This conference sets the ground rules for the whole case, so treating it as a formality is a mistake.
Non-Discovery Motions
The federal summary judgment rule, Rule 56, does not require a meet and confer on its own.3Cornell Law School. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 56 Many local rules go further than the federal rules, though, extending the obligation to motions for summary judgment, motions in limine, and certain pleading motions. Your scheduling order can also add requirements the federal rules don’t impose. Check your court’s local rules and the assigned judge’s standing orders before you file anything.
What Counts as a Real Meet and Confer
The requirement is a two-way conversation. This is where parties routinely trip. Sending a letter that catalogs the other side’s failures and demands compliance by a deadline is not conferring. Courts have denied motions to compel on exactly that basis, finding that one-sided written demands do not satisfy the good-faith requirement no matter how thorough they are.1Cornell Law School. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 37
A real meet and confer means speaking with opposing counsel by phone, video, or in person. The discussion covers the specific issues in dispute, each side’s position, and possible compromises. Email exchanges generally do not qualify, though written communications before and after the conversation help document it. Three outcomes are possible: a full agreement that keeps the dispute away from the court, a partial agreement that narrows what remains, or an impasse that lets the moving party go forward with a motion. Even an impasse is useful, because the judge then knows exactly what the parties could not work out on their own.
What “Good Faith” Means
Rule 37’s certification requires more than going through the motions. Good faith means actually engaging with the other side’s concerns, offering compromises, and exploring alternatives to court intervention. Showing up with a rigid take-it-or-leave-it position is not good faith even if the call lasts an hour.
Courts look at the totality of the effort, and the complexity of the dispute drives what is enough. A single call may suffice for a simple disagreement over the format of document production. A sprawling fight over privilege designations across thousands of documents likely requires multiple conversations, often supplemented by detailed written proposals. The standard is flexible; the underlying question is always whether the moving party made a genuine effort to resolve the issue without the court’s help.
The Certification You File With the Motion
When the conversation does not resolve the dispute, the motion must include a certification, sometimes called a meet and confer declaration or certificate of conference. It is a signed statement, filed with the motion, showing the judge that the party fulfilled the obligation to try informal resolution first.1Cornell Law School. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 37
Under the federal rules, the certification must state that the movant conferred or attempted to confer in good faith. Many local rules and state procedures ask for more: the date and method of each communication, the names of the attorneys who participated, a summary of what was discussed, and identification of the issues that remain open. A vague certification can sink an otherwise strong motion, so most attorneys err toward specificity even when the rules don’t require it.
What Happens If You Skip It
The consequences are blunt. A judge can deny your motion outright for failure to meet and confer, regardless of the merits. That denial is usually without prejudice to refiling after a proper conference, and some judges will order the parties to meet in person before any renewed motion will be considered.
Monetary sanctions are also on the table. When a motion to compel is granted, Rule 37 generally requires the losing side to pay the winning party’s reasonable expenses, including attorney’s fees, unless the losing position was “substantially justified” or an award would be unjust.1Cornell Law School. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 37 Those sanctions can fall on the party, on the attorney who counseled the noncompliance, or on both. Judges take the obligation seriously because it directly affects their workload, and treating it as optional is one of the quickest ways to lose credibility with the court.
If You’re Representing Yourself
The requirement applies to self-represented litigants the same way it applies to attorneys. The federal rules use the word “party” without distinguishing between represented and unrepresented, so you cannot skip the step because you don’t have a lawyer.1Cornell Law School. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 37 You are responsible for contacting opposing counsel, having a substantive discussion about the dispute, and documenting the effort.
The practical challenge is real. Calling an experienced attorney to negotiate a discovery compromise is intimidating, and the power dynamic is uneven. Courts still expect both sides to participate in good faith, and an attorney who stonewalls a self-represented party risks sanctions just as they would with another lawyer. For the Rule 26(f) planning conference, all attorneys and all unrepresented parties who have appeared in the case share responsibility for arranging and participating.2U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. Rule 26 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
Exceptions and Court-Specific Variations
Not every motion requires a conference first. Emergency motions, such as requests for a temporary restraining order, are typically exempt because the urgency makes advance conferral impractical. Cases exempted from initial disclosure under Rule 26(a)(1)(B) are also excluded from the Rule 26(f) planning conference. Some courts carve out additional exceptions for incarcerated self-represented parties, allowing written communications to satisfy the conferral requirement when phone or in-person contact isn’t feasible.
A court can also modify the requirement through its scheduling order. Under Rule 16, a judge may direct that before filing any discovery motion, the moving party must first request an informal conference with the court rather than filing a motion.4Cornell Law School. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 16 These informal discovery conferences serve the same screening purpose, with a judge or magistrate offering immediate guidance. Procedures vary widely from court to court, so reading the local rules at the start of a case is one of the more practical steps a litigant can take.