Must I Supplement Discovery Responses with newly discovered facts?

[Underdog]

It is improper to ask an interrogatory which asks that the responding party continously supplement their responses. See CCP 2037(c)(7)

(See generally Weil & Brown, Cal. Practice Guide: Civil Procedure Before Trial (The Rutter Group 2004) ¶ 8:1119, p. 8F (rev. #1, 2000) [“The responding party need only provide such information as is available at the time the answers are prepared. There is no duty to update or amend the answers, either to correct errors or to include new information discovered later. [Citation.]” (Italics in original.)].)

However, you can voluntarily choose to supplement a discovery response. See CCP § 2030 (m), which provides that if a party amends an interrogatory answer in a manner that “substantially prejudice[s]” the propounding party, the latter may move for an order deeming the original answer binding, but only after making “a reasonable and good faith attempt” to resolve the issue informally.

[NBEsq]

If I want my opponent to update dicovery responses, Interrogatories for example, I just send out another set of Special Interrogatories prior to the discovery cut-off that requests the other side to review all prior responses to interrogatories and to update them if necessary.