Early in most California employment lawsuits, the plaintiff serves the Judicial Council’s Form Interrogatories – Employment Law (DISC-002). The form looks routine. It isn’t. Interrogatory 201.1 asks the employer to “state all reasons for the EMPLOYEE’S TERMINATION,” and 216.1 asks for the facts behind every affirmative defense. Those answers are signed under oath by someone at the company, and they tend to define the defense at summary judgment and trial. A thin or inconsistent answer can be quoted back for the rest of the case.
What is DISC-002, and why does it matter?
It’s a standard set of questions approved for employment cases. The form is labeled “Form Approved for Optional Use,” which means the asking party chooses which numbered questions to check. Its sections run from “200.0 Contract Formation” and “201.0 Adverse Employment Action” through discrimination, harassment, disability, internal and governmental complaints, damages, insurance, investigation, and a final section on denials and affirmative defenses.
Some sections are directed only to the employee and some only to the employer. The defined terms, printed in capitals throughout the form, control the meaning of each question. For example, the form defines TERMINATION as “the actual or constructive termination” of employment, so an employer that says no termination occurred in a constructive discharge case still has to deal with the definition.
Which questions are the most important for employers?
The 201 series, which asks for the reason behind the decision. Interrogatory 201.1 asks whether the employee was involved in a termination and, if so, to “state all reasons for the EMPLOYEE’S TERMINATION” and to identify each person who participated in the decision. Interrogatory 201.4 asks whether the action was based in whole or in part on job performance and, if so, to “identify the EMPLOYEE’S specific job performance that played a role in that ADVERSE EMPLOYMENT ACTION.”
These answers matter because California discrimination and retaliation cases often turn on whether the employer’s stated reason is true. A plaintiff trying to show pretext looks for shifting explanations. If the termination letter says restructuring, the 201.1 answer says performance, and the manager testifies about attendance, the plaintiff has a pretext argument built from the company’s own words.
The safer approach is to answer 201.1 in full and consistently with the documents. “All reasons” means all of them. Leaving one out to keep the answer simple can create a bigger problem later, when the omitted reason surfaces in a deposition.
Interrogatory 201.2 is a different kind of trap. It asks: “Are there any facts that would support the EMPLOYEE’S TERMINATION that were first discovered after the TERMINATION?” Facts learned later, such as résumé fraud found during discovery, can limit damages under the after-acquired evidence doctrine. The answer needs to be accurate, and it needs to be updated if new facts come to light.
How should the company answer the affirmative defense question?
With real facts and supporting witnesses for each defense. Interrogatory 216.1 asks the responding party to “Identify each denial of a material allegation and each special or affirmative defense in your PLEADINGS” and, for each, to “state all facts upon which you base the denial” or defense, along with the people who know those facts and the supporting documents.
Answers often list twenty boilerplate defenses copied from the answer with no supporting facts. That invites a motion to compel and, later, an argument that a defense was waived or has no evidentiary support. The better course is to review the answer’s defenses at this stage, withdraw the ones that don’t apply, and give real content for the ones that do, such as failure to mitigate, the same-decision defense, or the statute of limitations defense where it fits.
Who signs the responses, and what does that mean?
An officer or agent, under oath. Code of Civil Procedure section 2030.250(b) says that if the responding party is a corporation, partnership, or similar entity, “one of its officers or agents shall sign the response under oath on behalf of that party.” The same subdivision adds that if the person signing is the company’s attorney acting in that capacity, the company “waives any lawyer-client privilege and any protection for work product” during later discovery about the sources of the information.
That’s a strong reason to have a company representative, not outside counsel, verify the answers. Pick someone who can explain at a deposition how the answers were assembled.
The answers also have to be complete. Section 2030.220(a) says “Each answer in a response to interrogatories shall be as complete and straightforward as the information reasonably available to the responding party permits.” When the verifier lacks personal knowledge, subdivision (c) requires “a reasonable and good faith effort to obtain the information by inquiry to other natural persons or organizations.” “We don’t know” isn’t an acceptable answer for information sitting in the HR file.
Key DISC-002 questions directed to employers
| Interrogatory | What it asks | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|
| 201.1 | All reasons for the termination and who decided | Sets the stated reason for pretext analysis |
| 201.2 | Facts first discovered after termination | After-acquired evidence and damages |
| 201.4 | Performance basis and the documents relied on | Ties the reason to policies and records |
| 211.1 | Benefits the employee would have received | Feeds the damages model |
| 214.1 | Insurance in effect for the claim | Discloses the EPLI policy |
| 215.1 | Interviews about the adverse action | Reaches the investigation and privilege questions |
| 216.1 | Facts behind each denial and defense | Tests every affirmative defense |
Getting the responses right
- Confirm the litigation hold covers the personnel file, the termination documents, investigation notes, and the emails and texts of everyone who took part in the decision.
- Calendar the response deadline from the date of service, and confirm whether the EPLI carrier needs to be told about the discovery and whether an arbitration agreement changes the forum.
- Identify every person who participated in the decision, so the 201.1 list is complete, and make sure none of them takes further action toward the plaintiff that could look like retaliation.
- Pull the termination letter, performance reviews and write-ups along with the policies, and compare them line by line with the draft answers.
- Have counsel prepare the objections and review the final answers with the verifier before anyone signs.
The firm’s page on employer defense in California employment cases describes how it handles discovery in these lawsuits. A related post covers demurrers to employment complaints.
DISC-002 questions from employers
Can we object instead of answering?
Objections are allowed when they’re legitimate, such as privilege or a question that doesn’t fit the case. Section 2030.250(c) says “The attorney for the responding party shall sign any responses that contain an objection.” Blanket objections to standard questions on the Judicial Council form rarely hold up, and a motion to compel can bring sanctions.
Does the insurance question require us to disclose our EPLI policy?
Generally yes. Interrogatory 214.1 asks whether, at the time of the adverse action, there was “any policy of insurance through which you were or might be insured in any manner for the damages, claims, or actions” arising from it. Coordinate the answer with the carrier, since the policy terms and reservation of rights letters may matter.
What if the reasons change after we answer?
Update the answer. A response that turns out to be incomplete should be supplemented with an amended response, verified the same way. Waiting until trial to explain a new reason is far worse than correcting the record early, because the gap itself becomes the plaintiff’s evidence.
Do the questions about our investigation waive privilege?
Not automatically. Interrogatory 215.1 asks whether “YOU OR ANYONE ACTING ON YOUR BEHALF” interviewed anyone about the adverse action. Investigations run by counsel may be protected, but relying on the investigation as a defense can put it at issue. That decision should be made deliberately, before the answer is served.
If your company has been served with employment form interrogatories
If your company has received DISC-002 interrogatories in an employment lawsuit, the answers to 201.1 and 216.1 often shape the rest of the case. Rosenberger + Kawabata represents employers defending employment lawsuits and claims through its business litigation practice, including discovery in wrongful termination cases. Contact Rosenberger + Kawabata online for a confidential consultation, or call (310) 894-6921.
Sources
The form is the Judicial Council’s Form Interrogatories – Employment Law, DISC-002 (Rev. January 1, 2009). The statutes are Code of Civil Procedure section 2030.220 and section 2030.250.
This post is general information about California and federal employment law as of November 7, 2026. It is not legal advice, and reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship. Employment statutes, regulations, and court decisions change often, and the outcome of any claim depends on its facts. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes.