Responding to Interrogatories New York: CPLR Guide

Legal content overseen by Nathan Walter, Esq., attorney licensed in California (State Bar No. 313299).

Responding to interrogatories in New York starts with a 20-day clock: under CPLR 3133(a), the served party gives a separate answer to each interrogatory or states the reasons for an objection with reasonable particularity. The 20 days run from service, not from receipt.

Before drafting, a plaintiff-side reviewer in a negligence-only injury case has a second question: CPLR 3130(1) restricts serving interrogatories on and deposing the same party without leave of court.

This guide covers the response period, use restrictions, limits, objections, oath and affirmation options, and later corrections. It does not calculate a due date for any matter.

Responding to interrogatories New York: which rules apply?

New York discovery rules come mainly from the CPLR and, in Supreme Court and County Court, 22 NYCRR Part 202. They do not follow the federal rules.

Start with CPLR 3130 to 3133 and 3101

CPLR 3130 governs when interrogatories may be used, CPLR 3131 their scope, CPLR 3132 when and on whom they are served, and CPLR 3133 the answers. The Public.Law New York mirror reproduces the text, though it is nonofficial. Under CPLR 3131, interrogatories may relate to any matters embraced in CPLR 3101, and answers may be used to the same extent as party depositions. CPLR 3101(a) calls for full disclosure of all matter “material and necessary in the prosecution or defense of an action,” which is the wording of New York’s statutory disclosure standard. For the general concept, see interrogatories in discovery.

Identify the court, claims and governing orders

22 NYCRR 202.1(a) says Part 202 applies to civil actions in the Supreme Court and the County Court, and 202.1(d) says it is construed consistently with the CPLR. Check which court the case is in, whether a preliminary conference order changes the defaults, and whether the case is in the Commercial Division, which has its own interrogatory rule (covered below).

For other states, see our California, Texas and Florida guides, or the plaintiff firm workflows.

Check New York’s restrictions before preparing answers

These restrictions can affect a set before anyone drafts an answer, and they apply to either side.

Interrogatories and a deposition of the same party

CPLR 3130(1) provides that in an action to recover damages for personal injury, injury to property or wrongful death “predicated solely on a cause or causes of action for negligence,” a party “shall not be permitted to serve interrogatories on and conduct a deposition of the same party pursuant to rule 3107 without leave of court.”

Each qualifier narrows the restriction:

• The action seeks damages for personal injury, injury to property or wrongful death.
• The action is predicated solely on negligence causes of action.
• The interrogatories and the deposition are directed to the same party.
• The restriction applies absent leave of court.

It is not a blanket ban on interrogatories in injury cases. A case pleading a non-negligence cause of action falls outside the sentence’s wording, and the statute states no “good cause” standard for leave.

Interrogatories and a bill of particulars

CPLR 3130(1) also provides that, except in a matrimonial action, a party may not serve interrogatories on another party and also demand a bill of particulars of the same party under CPLR 3041.

When interrogatories may be served

Under CPLR 3132, a party may serve written interrogatories on any other party after commencement. They may not be served on a defendant before that defendant’s time to serve a responsive pleading has expired, except by leave of court granted with or without notice. A copy of the interrogatories and of any order made under the rule must be served on each party.

That is a service gate, not the answer deadline. CPLR 3130(2) also permits court-ordered nonparty interrogatories in a matrimonial action or proceeding, on motion and court-directed notice, limited to financial information about a party that is reasonable and necessary to the prosecution or defense.

Calendar the response and supplementation deadlines

The table summarizes the timing rules covered below. It does not calculate any due date.

Event	Timing	Rule and qualification
Serve answers or particular objections	Base period: within 20 days after service of the interrogatories	CPLR 3133(a); served on each party
Serve interrogatories on a defendant	After the defendant’s time to serve a responsive pleading expires	CPLR 3132; earlier service needs leave of court
Correct or supplement a prior response	Promptly after obtaining the information	CPLR 3101(h); conditions below
Commercial Division contention interrogatories	At the conclusion of other discovery, at least 30 days before the discovery cut-off	Rule 11-a(d); service timing only

The base 20-day response period

CPLR 3133(a) requires the served party, within twenty days after service of the interrogatories, to serve on each of the parties a copy of the answer to each interrogatory. The exception is an interrogatory the party objects to, in which case the reasons for the objection are to be stated with reasonable particularity.

Service method and the actual case calendar

How a set was served can affect how a period measured from service is counted. This guide does not state a service-method extension, so confirm the method of service and any stipulation or order that changes the response date.

Prompt supplementation is not a new 20-day window

CPLR 3101(h) is a separate duty. A party must amend or supplement a response given to a disclosure request “promptly” after learning that the response was incorrect or incomplete when made. The same duty applies if the response, though correct when made, is no longer correct and complete and a failure to amend or supplement would be materially misleading.

The statute gives no fixed number of days. The trigger is obtaining the information.

Count interrogatories and check Commercial Division limits

Two court rules add limits beyond CPLR 3130. Part 202 caps the number of questions; Commercial Division Rule 11-a also limits topics and timing.

The Part 202 cap includes subparts

22 NYCRR 202.20 provides that interrogatories are limited to 25 in number, including subparts, unless the parties agree or the court orders otherwise. The limit applies to consolidated actions as well. It sits in Part 202, so it applies in Supreme Court and County Court under 202.1(a). The Cornell LII reproduction of 202.20 is nonofficial, so check the rule’s current text and numbering at the court system’s site.

The cap is separate from the CPLR 3130(1) restriction: a set within 25 can still raise the same-party question. Count each subpart as a separate interrogatory.

Rule 11-a limits topics as well as numbers

Commercial Division Rule 11-a (22 NYCRR 202.70) applies only in that division. Do not assume it governs an ordinary personal-injury case. The Cornell LII reproduction of Rule 11-a sets four limits:

• (a) Number: 25 including subparts, unless the preliminary conference order specifies another limit.
• (b) Topics: unless the court orders otherwise, the names of witnesses with knowledge of information material and necessary to the subject matter of the action, computation of each category of damage alleged, and the existence, custodian, location and general description of material and necessary documents, including pertinent insurance agreements, and other physical evidence.
• (c) Other topics: during discovery, only if the parties consent or the court orders it for good cause shown.
• (d) Contentions: interrogatories seeking the opposing party’s claims and contentions may be served at the conclusion of other discovery and at least 30 days before the discovery cut-off, unless the court has ordered otherwise.

The 30 days in paragraph (d) concern when contention interrogatories may be served. They are not a 30-day period to answer.

Prepare particular objections and properly affirmed answers

Match each answer to its question

CPLR 3133(b) says each question must be answered separately and fully, and each answer must be preceded by the question to which it responds. The text refers to answers. It does not expressly say every objection must restate the question, though a response set out question by question is the natural way to meet both requirements.

The same subdivision says interrogatories must be answered in writing under oath by the party served if an individual. If the party served is a corporation, partnership or sole proprietorship, the answers come from an officer, director, member, agent or employee having the information. The attorney’s signature on the response does not replace the party’s own answers.

Explain the reason for each objection

An objection must state its reasons with reasonable particularity (CPLR 3133(a)). Article 31 grounds that can support an objection include:

• Scope: the question seeks matter beyond what is “material and necessary” under CPLR 3101(a).
• Privilege: under CPLR 3101(b), privileged matter is not obtainable on objection by a person entitled to assert the privilege.
• Work product: under CPLR 3101(c), the work product of an attorney is not obtainable.
• Abuse: a protective order may be sought under CPLR 3103(a) to prevent unreasonable annoyance, expense, embarrassment, disadvantage or other prejudice.

The statute does not say what happens to a late or generic objection, so this guide claims no automatic waiver.

Understand the oath and affirmation options

CPLR 3133(b) uses the words “under oath.” Current CPLR 2106(a) also provides that a statement affirmed to be true under the penalties of perjury may be used in New York in lieu of an affidavit, and its list includes “an answer to interrogatories.” Read together, the two provisions do not describe notarization as the only route. Check the current text of both provisions, and do not confuse this affirmation with the counsel affirmation for discovery motions under 202.7.

Keep document demands and admissions separate

Document demands and notices to admit follow their own rules. 22 NYCRR 202.20-c concerns responses to document requests under CPLR 3122(a), not the interrogatory oath. See our guides on responding to New York document demands and responding to a New York notice to admit.

Review New York response examples and later corrections

The examples below are invented for illustration. The sample wording is not a court-approved form.

A negligence-only claim after the plaintiff’s deposition

A plaintiff sues in Supreme Court for injuries from a fall in a store, pleading only negligence. The defendant deposed the plaintiff last month, and the plaintiff’s firm now receives interrogatories addressed to the plaintiff. The reviewer checks the statutory points: personal injury damages, negligence only, the same party, and whether an order gave leave. This guide does not suggest the set can be ignored.

Correcting an incomplete lost-earnings answer

A plaintiff’s served answer gave lost earnings for one period. The client later finds payroll records for another period.

Because the original answer was incomplete when made, CPLR 3101(h) calls for prompt supplementation. CPLR 3133(c) is different: other amendments need a court order on motion. For changed circumstances, the duty applies where a failure to supplement would be materially misleading.

Final response review

As a practice checklist, not a legal mandate, confirm that:

• each response is numbered to match its request;
• facts are checked against client records;
• each objection has a specific reason;
• the oath or affirmation fits the responding party;
• the governing orders and record of service are in the file.

Address disputes, protective orders and noncompliance

Confer before motion practice

For a motion relating to disclosure, 22 NYCRR 202.7(a) requires an affirmation that counsel has conferred with opposing counsel in a good faith effort to resolve the issues. Under 202.7(c), the affirmation must state the time, place and nature of the consultation and the issues discussed and any resolutions, or state good cause why no conferral was held. Under 202.7(d), an order to show cause or ex parte application must contain the affirmation if it is otherwise required.

The more specific rule is 22 NYCRR 202.20-f. Absent exigent circumstances, counsel must consult by in-person or telephonic conference before contacting the court about a disclosure dispute. If motion practice is necessary, counsel must submit an affidavit or affirmation attesting to the conference and stating its date, time, participants and length. If an adverse party’s unreasonable failure or refusal prevents a conference, the moving party’s affidavit or affirmation must detail the efforts to obtain one and the responses received. A letter alone is not the conference the rule describes.

Under 202.20-f(c), noncompliance may result in denial of a discovery motion without prejudice to renewal, or in the motion being held in abeyance.

Protective orders and motions to compel

Under CPLR 3103(a), a court may deny, limit, condition or regulate the use of any disclosure device through a protective order, on its own initiative or on motion of a party or of a person from whom or about whom discovery is sought. Under CPLR 3103(b), service of a notice of motion for a protective order suspends disclosure of the particular matter in dispute. An objection stated in a response is not the service of a notice of motion.

CPLR 3124 allows the party seeking disclosure to move to compel compliance or a response when a person fails to respond to or comply with an interrogatory. A notice to admit under CPLR 3123 is excluded from that rule.

Court-ordered consequences under CPLR 3126

CPLR 3126 applies when a party refuses to obey a disclosure order or wilfully fails to disclose information the court finds ought to have been disclosed. The court may then make such orders as are just, including resolving the relevant issues against the disobedient party, prohibiting it from supporting or opposing designated claims or using certain witnesses or evidence, striking pleadings, staying proceedings, dismissing the action or part of it, or rendering a default judgment.

These orders are discretionary. The statute does not make dismissal automatic after a missed deadline, and this guide does not claim a prior order is always required.

Prepare attorney-reviewed interrogatory responses with Briefpoint

Briefpoint drafts responses and objections to interrogatories, and the output is editable in Microsoft Word. The attorney keeps final review and decides what is served. For a plaintiff-side team, the client-fact checklist above can guide that review of the draft responses. Briefpoint does not decide whether a New York restriction applies or whether leave of court is needed.

Briefpoint supports interrogatory response drafting by drafting responses and objections for attorney review. For treatment, work history and earnings facts, Client Bridge sends clients plain-language questions through a secure link, and their answers and uploaded documents are available for attorney review. See the plaintiff solutions page for the wider workflow.

Book a demo to see how it works on your own requests.

See how Briefpoint drafts discovery responses:

FAQs About Responding to Interrogatories New York

How long do I have to answer interrogatories in New York?

The base period is 20 days after service of the interrogatories under CPLR 3133(a). Within that time, the served party serves each party with answers and any objections; the reasons for each objection must be stated with reasonable particularity. The period runs from service, so check the method of service and any order or stipulation that changes the date.

Who signs interrogatory answers when the responding party is a company?

Under CPLR 3133(b), a corporation, partnership or sole proprietorship answers through an officer, director, member, agent or employee having the information. The answers are made under oath. CPLR 2106(a) also allows an affirmation under penalty of perjury in place of an affidavit, and it lists answers to interrogatories among the documents covered.

Do I have to answer every interrogatory, or can I object?

You can object. An interrogatory the party objects to is not answered, and the reasons for the objection must be stated with reasonable particularity under CPLR 3133(a). Every other question must be answered separately and fully under 3133(b). If a set is improper as a whole, CPLR 3103 provides the protective order route.

Can I change interrogatory answers after serving them?

Sometimes, by different routes. CPLR 3101(h) requires prompt amendment or supplementation when a response was incorrect or incomplete when made, or is no longer correct and a failure to update would be materially misleading. Under CPLR 3133(c), other amendments or supplements need a court order on motion.

Does each interrogatory answer need to repeat the question?

Yes, each answer must be preceded by the question it responds to under CPLR 3133(b). The text speaks of answers, and it also requires each question to be answered separately and fully. Setting out the question first, then the answer or the objection and its reasons, is the usual way to organize a response.

The information provided on this website does not, and is not intended to, constitute legal advice; instead, all information, content, and materials available on this site are for general informational purposes only. Information on this website may not constitute the most up-to-date legal or other information. This website contains links to other third-party websites. Such links are only for the convenience of the reader, user or browser. Readers of this website should contact their attorney to obtain advice with respect to any particular legal matter. No reader, user, or browser of this site should act or refrain from acting on the basis of information on this site without first seeking legal advice from counsel in the relevant jurisdiction. Only your individual attorney can provide assurances that the information contained herein – and your interpretation of it – is applicable or appropriate to your particular situation. Use of, and access to, this website or any of the links or resources contained within the site do not create an attorney-client relationship between the reader, user, or browser and website authors, contributors, contributing law firms, or committee members and their respective employers.