Pare v. Rodrique

Appellant raises the single issue of whether “interrogatories become continuing in nature, so as to require supplementary answers at a later date, by the simple statement of the proponent that they are in fact continuing?”

The environment in which the question arose was this. Appellant, Pare, sued appellee, Rodrique, for damages resulting from an automobile accident that occurred in August 1966. Rodrique filed the general issue plea on January 17, 1967, and the next day he propounded interrogatories to Pare pursuant to Maryland Rule 417. Question number eight was “attach hereto a copy of any…