By Julie Bays, OBA Management Assistance Program Director

If you’ve been practicing for a while, you’ve likely noticed that discovery is starting to look a little different.

That shift is not accidental.

The Oklahoma Discovery Code already builds in the concept of proportionality. Discovery must be tailored to the needs of the case, taking into account things like the amount in controversy, the parties’ resources, and whether the burden outweighs the benefit.

But what we are seeing now is something more than just a rule on paper. Courts are actively reinforcing it. Recent guidance from the Oklahoma Supreme Court makes clear that discovery is not unlimited, and judges are expected to limit requests that are cumulative, duplicative, or overly burdensome. Chick-Fil-A v. The Honorable Richard Odgen and Lozada, et al. 2026 OK 13.

Justin Lollman recently highlighted this ruling and what it means for discovery practice. You can read his discussion here:

LinkedIn post Justin Lollman

And that message is not unique to Oklahoma.

At ABA TECHSHOW this year, two judges addressed this issue directly. Their advice to lawyers was refreshingly practical: do some eDiscovery before you begin fighting about it. You can read a summary here:

Do-some-eDiscovery-before-you-begin-fighting

The takeaway from all of this is the same: understand your data first.

Too often, lawyers launch into discovery disputes without knowing what actually exists, where it is located, or how difficult it will be to retrieve. That leads to unnecessary motions, increased costs, and delays that do not serve the client or the court.

Discovery is no longer about asking for everything and sorting it out later. It is about being intentional from the start.

That has some real implications for your practice:

• Before drafting requests, take time to understand the likely sources of information.
• Think about what actually matters to your claims or defenses.
• Be prepared to explain why your requests are proportional to the case.

It also means rethinking some long-standing habits.

Boilerplate discovery requests and “just in case” approaches are becoming harder to justify. Courts are increasingly willing to limit discovery that is not focused or that creates unnecessary burden.

The better approach is to front-load your effort. Learn the data, narrow the issues, and then draft discovery that reflects that work.

Technology can help here. Whether you are using case management systems, document review tools, or even AI to help identify key issues, the goal is the same: more informed and more efficient discovery.

Better discovery is smarter, earlier, and more intentional.