![discount drexel heritage furniture discount drexel heritage furniture](https://cdn.incollect.com/sites/default/files/zoom/-Drexel-Drexel-Heritage-Furniture-Barney-Flagg-Drexel-Parallel-Mid-Century-4-Drawer-Chest-437683-1832908.jpg)
Rules 33(b)(4) and 34(b) should be so read. Courts have long viewed the discovery rules as an integrated mechanism to be read in pari materia. Such a construction of Rule 34 makes it similar to, and compatible with, Rule 33(b)(4) which provides for waiver, and also relief from waiver for good cause. The Court finds the reasoning of the Treatise to be sound, both as to implicit waiver and the caution.
![discount drexel heritage furniture discount drexel heritage furniture](https://d6qwfb5pdou4u.cloudfront.net/product-images/6460001-6470000/6467847/24c990554ecec631d62e2c4faa3871b65f527526419ca545fdab73aabc8ddfe4/1500-1500-frame-0.jpg)
The Treatise cautions that courts "should avoid hair-trigger findings of waiver." Id. The Court agrees and adds that there would be no point to require such a specific and detailed procedure for objections unless it were important to follow it and there were consequences for failure to do so. The Treatise endorses this view, especially in light of the 1993 amendments adding Rule 26(b)(5) which specifically requires a claim of privilege to be expressly made with a description of the documents withheld. Some courts have previously found that failure to make an explicit timely objection based on privilege waives the objection. Therefore, the Court finds the waiver to be an implicit one. 34 does not explicitly provide for waiver when objections are not stated, Rule 34(b), like Rule 33(b)(4), requires the reasons for any objections to be explicitly stated. See 8A Charles Alan Wright, et al., Federal Practice and Procedure ยง 2173, at 296 (1994) ("The Treatise"). 33 (b)(4) clearly requires the statement of specific objections and the rule provides that failure to do so may result in a waiver of the objection.