8 Ways to Optimize Your Litigation Workflow

READ MORE

Interrogatories example: Questions and answers

Interrogatories example: Questions and answers

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

An interrogatories example is easiest to read as a numbered written question paired with a numbered written answer. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 33, one party serves the questions on another, and each interrogatory must be answered separately and fully in writing under oath to the extent it is not objected to.

This guide covers civil discovery in U.S. district courts under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure; state-court practice is outside its scope.

The five samples below show format and phrasing, not a complete, service-ready set. After the samples come the federal rules on limits, timing, and signatures, then the steps for preparing answers. For background, see our overview of interrogatories in discovery.

Interrogatories example: Five questions and answers

The examples below are invented hypotheticals for illustration, not a complete discovery set or case-specific legal advice.

A party’s role in the incident

The plaintiff asks the defendant driver about his role.

The answer identifies the responding party as the driver, then stops. Rule 33(b)(3) calls for a full answer to the question asked, not a biography, and Rule 26(b)(1) limits discovery to relevant, proportional, nonprivileged matter.

Facts supporting a defense

The plaintiff asks the defendant for the facts behind a contention.

The answer gives what the driver saw and what Plaintiff said at the scene. A line such as “exercised reasonable care at all times” would state no facts. Under Rule 33(a)(2), an interrogatory is not objectionable merely because it asks for a contention that relates to fact or the application of law to fact. The court may defer the answer until designated discovery is complete or another time it sets.

A claimed wage-loss amount

The defendant asks the plaintiff for a wage-loss calculation.

The answer states the period and the basis, so the other side can test the arithmetic. It does not say that any wage loss, past or future, is recoverable. A defined period also fits Rule 26(b)(1) proportionality better than a request for all financial history.

People with knowledge of an employment decision

The employee-plaintiff asks the employer-defendant who decided.

When a corporation, partnership, association, or governmental agency is the responding party, Rule 33(b)(1)(B) says an officer or agent answers and “must furnish the information available to the party.” That is why this answer draws on personnel records and interviews, not only the signer’s memory.

Records supporting a damages calculation

The defendant asks the plaintiff to identify the supporting records.

Identifying a record in an answer differs from asking for its production, which is a Rule 34(a)(1) request. A Bates range (the sequential numbers stamped on produced pages) in an answer is not automatically a valid substitute for the answer itself, because Rule 33(d) sets conditions, covered below.

Federal rules that shape the examples

These entries summarize Rules 33, 26, and 6. Court orders and local requirements in the district also need review; this guide does not describe any local rule.

How to adapt the questions to your case

1. Tie the question to a disputed fact

Start from the pleadings. Identify what the parties disagree about, then write the question to reach that fact. Rule 26(b)(1) ties scope to a claim or defense and to proportionality.

2. Define the event and time period

Name the event, date, and place. “Describe your medical treatment” invites objections. “Identify each provider who treated the neck injury alleged in the complaint, from the collision date to the date of your answer” is easier to answer and to defend.

3. Review the set and its discrete subparts

Numbering on the page does not settle the Rule 33(a)(1) count. A question with several lettered parts may count as more than one interrogatory. Our guide on how to draft interrogatories covers the propounding workflow in more detail.

How to prepare complete answers and specific objections

1. Gather facts from the client and records

Reconcile names, dates, amounts, and organizational information from the client and the records. Briefpoint drafts responses and objections to interrogatories from that material. Client Bridge client collection is an optional way to send clients plain-language questions through a secure link and receive their answers and uploads for attorney review.

2. Answer each question fully

Rule 33(b)(3) requires a full answer to the extent the interrogatory is not objected to, so a short answer works only if it is complete. State what is known, say so where information is unknown, and do not guess. “Investigation is ongoing” does not excuse withholding information already available.

3. Explain any objection specifically

Rule 33(b)(4) requires the grounds for an objection to be stated with specificity. A ground not stated in a timely objection is waived unless the court, for good cause, excuses the failure.

Suppose a question asks about employment “ever.” An objection that explains why the period is overbroad for the claims at issue, and says the response covers a defined shorter period, is more specific than a list of stock grounds. The rest still needs a full answer under Rule 33(b)(3).

If information is withheld as privileged, Rule 26(b)(5)(A) requires the party to expressly make the claim and describe what is withheld so others can assess the claim without revealing privileged information. Our guide to objections to interrogatories covers specific grounds.

4. Review signatures and serve the response

Before service, check the signatures required by Rule 33(b)(5): the answering person’s on the answers and the objecting attorney’s on any objections. Serve the responses within the Rule 33(b)(2) period, as stipulated or ordered.

When records and later facts affect an answer

When Rule 33(d) permits a records-based answer

Rule 33(d) allows a business-records answer only if the answer may be determined by examining, auditing, compiling, abstracting, or summarizing a party’s business records (including electronically stored information) and the burden is substantially the same for either party. The responding party must also specify the records in enough detail for the other side to locate and identify them as readily as the responding party could, and give a reasonable opportunity to examine and audit them and to make copies, compilations, abstracts, or summaries.

Writing “see documents produced” or giving a Bates stamp alone does not meet those conditions. Rule 33(d) also differs from a question asking which documents exist, as in Interrogatory No. 5. Production belongs under Rule 34; see our page on requests for production. Autodoc document matching and Bates citations finds responsive documents and adds page-level Bates citations.

When a response must be supplemented

Under Rule 26(e)(1)(A), a party who has answered an interrogatory must supplement or correct the answer in a timely manner if it learns the answer is incomplete or incorrect in some material respect, and the additional or corrective information has not otherwise been made known to the other parties during discovery or in writing. Under Rule 26(e)(1)(B), the court may also order supplementation. A “reservation of rights” sentence neither creates this duty nor replaces it. The Supplemental Responses feature supports this stage.

Draft interrogatory responses with Briefpoint

Briefpoint drafts responses and objections to interrogatories for attorneys to review. For plaintiff firms, Client Bridge can send clients plain-language questions through a secure link and collect their answers and uploads for attorney review, so you can fill gaps in client facts before drafting. Output is editable in Microsoft Word, and attorneys keep final review.

Autodoc can find responsive documents, add page-level Bates citations, and build Bates-numbered production packages for the attorney to check. A draft is a starting point for that review, not a response ready to serve, and it does not guarantee compliance with Rule 33 or any court’s requirements. Reviewing each answer against the record and deciding on objections remains the attorney’s work.

For more on plaintiff-side use, see discovery software for plaintiff firms.

To see how Briefpoint fits your discovery workflow, Book a demo.

Watch the Briefpoint demo:

FAQs about interrogatories example

What is an example of an interrogatory?

One example is: “Describe your role in operating the vehicle involved in the March 3, 2026 collision.” Each answer is matched by number. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 33(a), a party may serve written interrogatories on another party, and Rule 33(b)(3) requires each to be answered separately and fully in writing under oath, to the extent it is not objected to.

How do you answer interrogatories?

Answer each interrogatory separately and fully in writing under oath, to the extent you do not object to it. Check the facts against the client’s account and records first. State any objection with specificity, because Rule 33(b)(4) treats grounds not stated in a timely objection as waived unless the court excuses the failure for good cause.

How many interrogatories can you ask in federal court?

Under Rule 33(a)(1), a party may serve no more than 25 written interrogatories on any other party, including all discrete subparts, unless the parties stipulate otherwise or the court orders a different number. The numbers on the page do not settle the count, because one numbered question with discrete subparts may count as more than one.

How long do you have to respond to interrogatories?

Rule 33(b)(2) sets 30 days after service of the interrogatories, unless the parties stipulate to a different time under Rule 29 or the court orders one. Rule 6(a)(1) excludes the day of service, counts intermediate weekends and legal holidays, and extends a period that ends on a weekend or legal holiday. Rule 6(d) adds 3 days only after certain service methods. Check the scheduling order.

Who signs interrogatory answers?

The person who makes the answers signs them, and the attorney who objects signs any objections, under Rule 33(b)(5). If the responding party is a corporation, partnership, association, or governmental agency, Rule 33(b)(1)(B) has an officer or agent answer and furnish the information available to the party. That person signs as the one making the answers.

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.

READ MORE

Legal Billing Software: What You Need to Know (+ 7 Best Options)

READ MORE

Will AI Replace Lawyers? The Future of Legal AI

READ MORE

Interrogatories vs Deposition: Federal Rules Compared

Interrogatories vs Deposition: Federal Rules Compared

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

In federal civil discovery, interrogatories are written questions served on another party under Rule 33(a)(1). An oral deposition examines a person under oath or affirmation, with live follow-up questions (Rule 30(a)(1), (c)(1)).

Both operate within the limits of Rule 26(b)(1), but the recipients, response format and procedural defaults differ. The distinction matters when you need information from a party rather than testimony from a particular person.

This interrogatories vs deposition comparison covers U.S. district-court practice under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP) and is written for plaintiff-side teams. For the full response process, see our federal interrogatories guide.

Interrogatories vs Deposition at a glance

The deposition column below describes an oral deposition under Rule 30. Depositions by written questions are covered separately.

*Each asterisk marks a default that can change. Under Rule 33(a)(1), the 25 includes all discrete subparts and can be changed by stipulation or court order. The ten depositions count Rules 30 and 31 together for each named side (plaintiffs, defendants or third-party defendants), and going beyond ten requires leave unless the parties stipulate (Rule 30(a)(2)(A)(i)). The 30-day response period in Rule 33(b)(2) can be shortened or lengthened by a permitted stipulation or court order. The one-day, seven-hour limit in Rule 30(d)(1) yields to stipulation or order. The court must allow additional time consistent with Rule 26(b)(1) and (2) if needed to examine the deponent fairly or if a person or circumstance impedes or delays the examination.

What interrogatories can establish

Interrogatories go only to another party, which may itself be a witness. A party may serve them on “any other party” under Rule 33(a)(1), and the answers must come in writing and under oath, to the extent a question is not objected to (Rule 33(b)(3)).

Party answers, available information and signatures

An individual answers for themselves. An entity answers through an officer or agent, who must furnish the information available to the party (Rule 33(b)(1)). That is wider than one person’s memory, which is why written answers often draw on records and on input from several people.

The person who answers signs the answers, and an attorney who objects signs the objections (Rule 33(b)(5)). Drafting help does not replace the answerer’s oath.

Facts and contentions

Interrogatories are not limited to background facts. Under Rule 33(a)(2), a question is not objectionable only because it asks for an opinion or contention that relates to fact, or the application of law to fact. The court may defer an answer to a contention question until a later stage, as the rule provides. For sample wording, see our interrogatory questions and answers.

What an oral deposition adds

A party can depose any person, including a party, by oral examination, and ordinarily needs no leave of court to do it (Rule 30(a)(1)). Attendance of a nonparty may be compelled by subpoena under Rule 45, which this article does not cover.

Live follow-up and the testimony record

The main procedural difference is the live exchange. The examiner can ask a follow-up question right after an answer, and the witness answers on the spot. That is an advantage in format, not a guarantee of fuller or more truthful testimony.

The noticing party gives reasonable written notice to every other party, with the time and place and identifying information for the deponent (Rule 30(b)(1)). The notice states how the testimony will be recorded. Unless the court orders otherwise, the recording may be audio, audiovisual or stenographic (Rule 30(b)(3)(A)). So a deposition does not always mean a stenographic transcript.

Remote depositions require a stipulation or a court order on motion (Rule 30(b)(4)).

A deposition by written questions is different

Rule 31 allows a deposition by written questions, which is sometimes mistaken for interrogatories. The party serves its questions on every other party, with notice. An officer then takes the testimony and prepares and certifies the deposition (Rule 31(a)(3) and 31(b)).

Interrogatory answers, by contrast, are prepared and signed by the party itself under Rule 33. Rule 31 also lacks the spontaneous follow-up of an oral deposition, because further questions are served in set rounds (Rule 31(a)(5)).

Federal limits, timing and objections

The 25-question and 30-day interrogatory defaults

A party may serve no more than 25 written interrogatories, including all discrete subparts, on any other party unless the parties stipulate or the court orders otherwise. A court may grant leave for more, consistent with Rule 26(b)(1) and (2) (Rule 33(a)(1)). The limit is not 25 per case or 25 per set.

Answers and objections are due within 30 days after service, unless a Rule 29 stipulation or a court order sets another time (Rule 33(b)(2)). Objections must be stated with specificity. A ground not stated in a timely objection is waived unless the court excuses the failure for good cause (Rule 33(b)(4)).

The deposition count and seven-hour default

Leave is needed, absent a stipulation, if a deposition would result in more than ten taken under Rules 30 and 31 by the plaintiffs, the defendants or the third-party defendants. Ten is not a limit per lawyer or per witness.

The separate duration default is one day of seven hours unless stipulated or ordered otherwise. Additional time must be allowed consistent with Rule 26(b)(1) and (2) when needed for fair examination or when the examination is impeded or delayed (Rule 30(d)(1)).

Absent a stipulation, leave is also needed to depose someone already deposed in the case or to take a deposition before the Rule 26(d) timing. For an early oral deposition, the exception requires certification in the notice, with supporting facts, that the deponent is expected to leave the United States and be unavailable for examination in this country after that time (Rule 30(a)(2)(A)(ii)–(iii)). A deponent confined in prison also requires leave, and the court must grant it to the extent consistent with Rule 26(b)(1) and (2) (Rule 30(a)(2)(B)).

Scope applies to both, but objections work differently

Both tools reach nonprivileged matter relevant to a claim or defense and proportional to the needs of the case. Information need not be admissible to be discoverable (Rule 26(b)(1)). The court must limit the frequency or extent of discovery if it determines that the discovery is unreasonably cumulative or duplicative, can be obtained from a more convenient, less burdensome or less expensive source, or falls outside Rule 26(b)(1)’s scope. It must also limit discovery if the requesting party has had ample opportunity to obtain the information through discovery in the action (Rule 26(b)(2)(C)).

In written answers, the responding party states its objections and answers the rest (Rule 33(b)(3)–(4)). At an oral deposition, objections are noted on the record, but the examination generally proceeds subject to them. Objections must be concise, nonargumentative and nonsuggestive, and a lawyer may instruct a deponent not to answer only to preserve a privilege, enforce a court-ordered limitation or present a motion under Rule 30(d)(3) (Rule 30(c)(2)). For more on objections, see our discovery objections reference.

How plaintiff firms can use both tools

The following example is invented to illustrate a discovery workflow. It is not advice for any particular case.

An employee challenges a performance-based termination. The employee’s team needs to know who made the decision and why.

Identify the decision and the people involved

The team serves an interrogatory on the employer asking it to identify the people who took part in the termination decision and to state the facts it relies on. To the extent the question is not objected to, the employer answers through an officer or agent using the information available to it; the answer must be under oath and signed (Rule 33(b)(1), (3), (5)).

The question seeks facts and contentions permitted by Rule 33(a)(2), subject to Rule 26(b)(1)’s relevance, privilege and proportionality limits. The written answer gives names and a stated factual basis.

Use testimony to clarify what remains unresolved

Suppose the answer names a manager and refers to a meeting. The team can then notice the manager’s oral deposition to ask what was said at the meeting and what a document reference means. The live format allows follow-up questions that a written answer cannot. Nothing about the format guarantees an admission.

Reconcile new information and plan the work

The attorney compares the written answers with what later testimony and documents show. Under Rule 26(e)(1)(A)–(B), a party that has answered an interrogatory must supplement or correct the answer in a timely manner if it learns the answer is materially incomplete or incorrect, unless the corrective information has otherwise been made known to the other parties in discovery or in writing. The party must also supplement or correct as ordered by the court.

Written-first is a workflow choice, not a required order. Under Rule 26(d)(3), methods of discovery may be used in any sequence unless the parties stipulate or the court orders otherwise, and one party’s discovery does not require another to delay.

Cost drivers differ by tool. Interrogatories mean drafting, collecting information from the client and reviewing answers. Depositions mean scheduling, examination and recording, and the noticing party bears the recording costs (Rule 30(b)(3)(A)). The rules do not rank one tool as cheaper overall. For the response side, see our federal discovery response workflow.

How answers and testimony may be used in court

Interrogatory answers are subject to evidence rules

Interrogatory answers may be used to the extent allowed by the Federal Rules of Evidence (Rule 33(c)). That is a qualified permission, not a rule that answers bind a party conclusively. Interrogatory answers are also not the same as admissions under Rule 36(b).

Deposition use depends on Rule 32

At a hearing or trial, a deposition may be used against a party if the party was present or represented at the deposition or had reasonable notice of it. The use must also be admissible under the rules of evidence as though the witness were present, and it must fall within a permitted use in Rule 32(a)(2)–(8) (Rule 32(a)(1)).

Permitted uses include:

• Contradicting or impeaching the deponent’s testimony as a witness (Rule 32(a)(2)).
• Use by an adverse party, for any purpose, of the deposition of a party or of someone who, when deposed, was the party’s officer, director, managing agent or designee under Rule 30(b)(6) or 31(a)(4) (Rule 32(a)(3)).
• Use of a witness’s deposition where the court finds the witness unavailable on grounds listed in the rule, such as death or inability to attend because of illness (Rule 32(a)(4)).

A deposition therefore does not replace live testimony in every case.

State rules

This comparison covers federal civil discovery. For a separate state-court guide, see responding to interrogatories in California.

Draft interrogatory responses with Briefpoint

Briefpoint supports the written side of this comparison. It drafts interrogatory responses and objections for attorney review, and the output is editable in Microsoft Word. The attorney keeps final review and the decision on every answer.

Client Bridge sends plain-language questions to the client by secure link, so the client can answer and upload documents for the attorney to review. A client’s submission provides information for attorney review; it does not replace the formal response. Under Rule 33(b)(2)–(5), answers must be given under oath to the extent not objected to and signed by the answerer; an attorney who objects signs the objections. The responding party must also serve its answers and objections.

The Briefpoint features discussed here support written discovery: drafting responses and objections, and collecting client information for attorney review. See how they fit plaintiff-side practices.

Book a demo to see how Briefpoint supports your interrogatory response workflow.

Watch the Briefpoint demo:

FAQs About Interrogatories vs Deposition

Are interrogatories or depositions better in a civil case?

Neither is better in every case. Interrogatories gather a party’s information and contentions in writing, while an oral deposition allows live questioning under oath or affirmation (Rule 30(c)(1)). Both operate within the scope of Rule 26(b)(1). Which one supplies what a case needs depends on who holds the information and on the limits that apply.

Do interrogatories have to come before a deposition?

No. Under Rule 26(d)(3), methods of discovery may be used in any sequence unless the parties stipulate or the court orders otherwise. Discovery generally cannot begin before the Rule 26(f) conference, subject to the exceptions in Rule 26(d)(1). Serving interrogatories first is one workflow, and nothing in the rule requires it.

Is a deposition by written questions the same as interrogatories?

No. Under Rule 31, written questions are served on the parties, and an officer takes and certifies the testimony. Under Rule 33(b)(3), interrogatory answers are prepared by the party and given in writing under oath. The first is a deposition taken through an officer, and the second is a party’s own written response.

How many interrogatories and depositions are allowed in federal court?

A party may serve up to 25 interrogatories, including discrete subparts, on any other party unless stipulated or ordered otherwise (Rule 33(a)(1)). For depositions, leave is required absent stipulation if more than ten would be taken under Rules 30 and 31 by the plaintiffs, the defendants or the third-party defendants (Rule 30(a)(2)(A)(i)). Neither number is per case.

Can interrogatory answers and deposition testimony be used at trial?

Possibly, but admissibility is not guaranteed. Interrogatory answers may be used to the extent the Federal Rules of Evidence allow (Rule 33(c)). A deposition may be used against a party who was present or represented at the deposition or had reasonable notice, if the evidence rules are satisfied and a permitted use applies, such as impeachment (Rule 32(a)(1)–(3)).

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.

READ MORE

21 Must-Have Apps for Lawyers in 2026

READ MORE

Interrogatories: Federal Rules, Answers, and Examples

Interrogatories: Federal Rules, Answers, and Examples

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

Imagine a defense team served with interrogatories, with the answers spread across a controller, an HR director and two former managers.

Interrogatories are written questions that one party serves on another in civil discovery. In federal court, each one must be answered separately and fully in writing under oath, to the extent it is not objected to (Fed. R. Civ. P. 33(b)(3)).

This guide covers interrogatories in U.S. district courts under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure: limits, answers, objections and signatures. For the wider response workflow, see our guide to federal discovery responses. A short section near the end links to state guides.

What are interrogatories, and what is their purpose?

An interrogatory “may relate to any matter that may be inquired into under Rule 26(b)” (Rule 33(a)(2)). Rule 26(b)(1) sets that scope: any nonprivileged matter that is relevant to a party’s claim or defense and proportional to the needs of the case (Rule 26(b)(1)).

Within that scope, an interrogatory can ask for facts, the identity of witnesses and documents, and the other party’s contentions.

Identifying a document is different from obtaining it. An interrogatory can ask a party to identify documents or the people who hold them, and the answer is information. Producing or permitting inspection of documents and electronically stored information in a party’s possession, custody, or control is the job of a request under Rule 34(a)(1). Our guide to requests for production covers that device. Rule 33(d), discussed below, is a conditional option for answering from business records.

Facts, witnesses, and contentions

Rule 33(a)(2) says an interrogatory “is not objectionable merely because it asks for an opinion or contention that relates to fact or the application of law to fact.” The court may order that such an interrogatory need not be answered until designated discovery is complete, or until a pretrial conference or some other time.

The court decides whether to defer a contention interrogatory on that basis; the responding party cannot do so unilaterally.

The 1970 Advisory Committee note to Rule 33 explains the limit on the other side: interrogatories “may not extend to issues of ‘pure law,’ i.e., legal issues unrelated to the facts of the case.” The same note says that questions applying law to fact “can be most useful in narrowing and sharpening the issues, which is a major purpose of discovery.” The question is whether the request is tied to the facts of the case.

Two short examples

These two questions are invented for illustration in a hypothetical employment case. They are not court-approved forms.

The first asks for witnesses. The second is a contention interrogatory asking for the facts behind a position. For sample answers, see our interrogatory question-and-answer examples.

Federal limits and response deadlines

These are federal defaults, not a complete deadline calculator. Qualifications follow the table.

Issue	Federal rule in brief	Authority
Number	25 to another party, including all discrete subparts, unless stipulated or ordered otherwise	Rule 33(a)(1)
Response time	Answers and objections within 30 days after service, subject to an authorized different period	Rule 33(b)(2); Rule 29
Answers	Separate, full written answers under oath to the extent not objected to	Rule 33(b)(3)
Signatures	Answer-maker signs answers; objecting attorney signs objections	Rule 33(b)(5)
Business records	Conditional option: substantially equal derivation burden, specific records, reasonable access	Rule 33(d)

Count discrete subparts, not just numbered questions

Rule 33(a)(1) provides that “a party may serve on any other party no more than 25 written interrogatories, including all discrete subparts.” The limit is not per set.

Because the rule counts discrete subparts, the numbering on the page does not control the count, and one numbered interrogatory may contain more than one. The rule text does not define “discrete,” and a multi-part question is not automatically improper.

“Leave to serve additional interrogatories may be granted to the extent consistent with Rule 26(b)(1) and (2),” and under Rule 26(b)(2)(A) the court may alter the limit by order (Rule 26(b)(2)(A)).

Check the governing response period

The responding party “must serve its answers and any objections within 30 days after being served with the interrogatories,” and “a shorter or longer time may be stipulated to under Rule 29 or be ordered by the court” (Rule 33(b)(2)).

Unless the court orders otherwise, Rule 29 allows parties to stipulate that “other procedures governing or limiting discovery be modified,” but “a stipulation extending the time for any form of discovery must have court approval if it would interfere with the time set for completing discovery, for hearing a motion, or for trial” (Rule 29(b)).

How to prepare complete answers

1. Gather information available to the party

When the responding party is “a public or private corporation, a partnership, an association, or a governmental agency,” the interrogatories are answered “by any officer or agent, who must furnish the information available to the party” (Rule 33(b)(1)(B)). The standard is information available to the party. It is not limited to what the person signing personally remembers or to what is already in a file.

For an entity client, an internal worksheet pairing each interrogatory with the people and systems likely to hold the answer, plus a list of unresolved facts, can help. The rule does not require either. Briefpoint includes Client Bridge client collection, which sends clients plain-language questions through a secure link so they can answer and upload documents for attorney review.

2. Answer each unobjectioned portion separately

Rule 33(b)(3) requires that each interrogatory, “to the extent it is not objected to, be answered separately and fully in writing under oath.” An objection to part of an interrogatory leaves the rest to be answered.

Use the information available to the party to prepare each answer; do not treat the signer’s memory as the limit of an entity’s response. Each interrogatory must be answered separately and fully to the extent not objected to, subject to Rule 33(d)’s conditional business-records option.

3. Obtain the required oath and signatures

Answers must be under oath, and “the person who makes the answers must sign them, and the attorney who objects must sign any objections” (Rule 33(b)(5)). The signer of the answers and the signer of the objections can be different people.

Collecting a client’s responses through an intake tool or questionnaire is not the same as sworn answers. Rule 33’s text does not prescribe a form of oath.

Make specific objections and answer the rest

Tie the ground to the request

“The grounds for objecting to an interrogatory must be stated with specificity” (Rule 33(b)(4)). A specific objection identifies what is wrong with the particular request, such as an ambiguous term, a time period that makes the request irrelevant or disproportionate to the needs of the case, or a burden that is out of proportion to the information sought.

The measure for scope and burden is Rule 26(b)(1): relevance to a claim or defense and proportionality, which considers factors including “the parties’ resources” and “whether the burden or expense of the proposed discovery outweighs its likely benefit.”

If information is withheld on a claim of privilege or trial-preparation protection, the party must “expressly make the claim” and describe what is withheld “in a manner that, without revealing information itself privileged or protected, will enable other parties to assess the claim” (Rule 26(b)(5)(A)).

Understand waiver and discovery disputes

Rule 33(b)(4) also says that “any ground not stated in a timely objection is waived unless the court, for good cause, excuses the failure.”

If the requesting party considers an answer inadequate, Rule 37(a) allows a motion to compel. The motion “must include a certification that the movant has in good faith conferred or attempted to confer” with the other side “in an effort to obtain it without court action” (Rule 37(a)(1)). For purposes of Rule 37(a), an evasive or incomplete answer is treated as a failure to answer.

If the motion is granted, or the discovery is supplied after filing, the court generally must award reasonable motion expenses after an opportunity to be heard. It must not do so if the movant failed to attempt resolution in good faith, the opposition was substantially justified, or other circumstances make an award unjust (Rule 37(a)(5)(A)).

A complete failure to respond is treated differently. Rule 37(d)(1)(A)(ii) allows the court, on motion, to order sanctions if a party “after being properly served with interrogatories under Rule 33 … fails to serve its answers, objections, or written response.” Under Rule 37(d)(2), that failure “is not excused on the ground that the discovery sought was objectionable, unless the party failing to act has a pending motion for a protective order under Rule 26(c).”

A Rule 37(d) motion must include a good-faith conference certification under Rule 37(d)(1)(B). Available sanctions may include the orders listed in Rule 37(b)(2)(A)(i)–(vi); Rule 37(d)(3) also requires reasonable expenses caused by the failure unless it was substantially justified or an award would be unjust (Rule 37(d)(3)).

When business records can supply the answer

Rule 33(d) lets a responding party answer by pointing to business records, but only under stated conditions. It is not a general license to hand over records in place of an answer.

Check the burden, identify the records, and provide access

The option applies “if the answer to an interrogatory may be determined by examining, auditing, compiling, abstracting, or summarizing a party’s business records (including electronically stored information), and if the burden of deriving or ascertaining the answer will be substantially the same for either party” (Rule 33(d)). If those conditions are met, the responding party may answer by:

1. specifying the records that must be reviewed, “in sufficient detail to enable the interrogating party to locate and identify them as readily as the responding party could”; and
2. giving the interrogating party “a reasonable opportunity to examine and audit the records and to make copies, compilations, abstracts, or summaries.”

A range of document page identifiers, often called Bates numbers, may help identify the records, but that range alone does not show that Rule 33(d)’s conditions are satisfied.

Correct materially incomplete or incorrect responses

A party that has responded to an interrogatory “must supplement or correct its … response” in a timely manner if it learns the response is “incomplete or incorrect” in some material respect, and the corrective information “has not otherwise been made known to the other parties during the discovery process or in writing.” The duty also applies “as ordered by the court” (Rule 26(e)(1)).

The rule sets no fixed number of days. To see what may need correcting, track new information against the answers already served.

If a party fails to supplement as Rule 26(e) requires, Rule 37(c)(1) bars that party from using the information to supply evidence on a motion, at a hearing or at trial, “unless the failure was substantially justified or is harmless” (Rule 37(c)(1)).

State rules

State courts set their own interrogatory procedure, and it may differ from the federal defaults above. The federal defaults above concern interrogatories under Rule 33 in U.S. district court civil litigation, not interrogatories in state court. Each guide below covers state-court procedure:

• responding to interrogatories in California
• responding to interrogatories in Texas
• responding to interrogatories in Florida

Draft interrogatory responses with Briefpoint

Briefpoint drafts responses and objections to interrogatories. The output is editable in Microsoft Word, and attorneys keep final review. Our page on interrogatory answer drafting describes that workflow.

For the client-information step, Client Bridge sends clients plain-language questions through a secure link so they can answer and upload documents for attorney review. Discovery Playbooks are also available.

The attorney retains final review of the draft, including its objections and factual statements. Client intake does not replace the sworn answers required by Rule 33(b)(3): the person making the answers signs them, and the attorney who objects signs the objections under Rule 33(b)(5).

Book a demo to see Briefpoint’s discovery-response workflow.

Watch the Briefpoint demo:

FAQs About Interrogatories

What is the purpose of interrogatories?

Interrogatories obtain information from another party in writing, such as facts, the identity of witnesses and documents, and the factual basis for the party’s contentions. Under Rule 33(a)(2), an interrogatory may relate to any matter within the scope of Rule 26(b), which covers nonprivileged matter relevant to a claim or defense and proportional to the needs of the case.

How many interrogatories can you serve in federal court?

A party may serve no more than 25 written interrogatories on any other party, including all discrete subparts, unless the parties stipulate otherwise or the court orders otherwise (Rule 33(a)(1)). The limit is not 25 per set or per side. Leave to serve more may be granted to the extent consistent with Rule 26(b)(1) and (2).

Do compound questions count as more than one interrogatory?

They can. Rule 33(a)(1) counts “all discrete subparts” toward the limit of 25, so one numbered interrogatory may count as more than one. The rule does not prohibit every question with several clauses, and its text does not define “discrete.” The limit itself can be changed by stipulation or by court order.

How long do you have to answer interrogatories?

In federal court the default is 30 days after being served, for both answers and objections (Rule 33(b)(2)). A shorter or longer period may be stipulated under Rule 29 or ordered by the court, and a stipulated extension needs court approval if it would interfere with the time set for completing discovery, hearing a motion or trial. State courts set their own periods.

Do interrogatory answers have to be signed under oath?

Yes. Each interrogatory must be answered “separately and fully in writing under oath” to the extent it is not objected to, and the person who makes the answers must sign them (Rule 33(b)(3) and (b)(5)). A corporation, partnership, association or governmental agency answers through an officer or agent, who must furnish the information available to the party. The attorney who objects signs the objections.

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.

READ MORE

Discovery Objections Cheat Sheet: Grounds and Examples

Discovery Objections Cheat Sheet: Grounds and Examples

This discovery objections cheat sheet covers written discovery only: interrogatories, requests for production, and requests for admission. It does not cover deposition or trial objections.

The quick reference below compares common grounds, the facts that support each one, and the language that is typically boilerplate. For background, see our discovery objections overview. To evaluate the other side’s responses, see how to read common discovery objections.

Federal rules come first. California has its own section so the two systems stay separate.

Jump to:

• Quick reference
• Federal rules
• Examples
• California
• Mistakes
• Briefpoint
• FAQs

Discovery Objections Cheat Sheet: Quick Reference

A defensible objection states the specific ground, ties it to facts, says what is withheld, and answers the rest. The “Still must do” line in each entry below is the part that often gets lost: an objection rarely excuses the whole response.

Federal rules by request type

Interrogatories: Rule 33

Rule 33 sets the baseline for interrogatories:

• Timing: Responses are due within 30 days after service unless the parties stipulate or the court orders otherwise (Rule 33(b)(2)).
• Answer what is not objected to: Each interrogatory must be answered separately and fully in writing under oath “to the extent it is not objected to” (Rule 33(b)(3)).
• Specificity: Grounds for objecting must be stated with specificity, and a ground not stated in a timely objection is waived unless the court excuses the failure for good cause (Rule 33(b)(4)).
• Signatures: The person who answers signs the answers, and the attorney who objects signs the objections (Rule 33(b)(5)).
• Numerical limit: A party may serve on any other party no more than 25 written interrogatories, including all discrete subparts, absent a stipulation or court order (Rule 33(a)(1)).
• Contentions: An interrogatory is not objectionable only because it asks for an opinion or contention that relates to fact or the application of law to fact (Rule 33(a)(2)).

For more examples, see our interrogatory objection examples.

Production: Rule 34

Rule 34 governs requests for production (RFPs). It reaches items in the responding party’s “possession, custody, or control” (Rule 34(a)(1)). The response requirements are specific:

• Reasons: For each item or category, the response must state that inspection will be permitted as requested or state with specificity the grounds for objecting, “including the reasons” (Rule 34(b)(2)(B)).
• Timing of production: Production must be completed by the requested inspection time or another reasonable time specified in the response (Rule 34(b)(2)(B)).
• Withholding statement: An objection must state whether any responsive materials are being withheld on the basis of that objection (Rule 34(b)(2)(C)).
• Partial objections: An objection to part of a request must specify the part and permit inspection of the rest (Rule 34(b)(2)(C)).
• Response time: The default is 30 days after service (Rule 34(b)(2)(A)).

Together, these provisions make a stand-alone general objection followed by a production “subject to” it hard to defend.

Admissions: Rule 36

Rule 36 governs requests for admission (RFAs). Requests may reach facts, the application of law to fact, and opinions about either, plus the genuineness of described documents (Rule 36(a)(1)). The response rules differ from Rules 33 and 34:

• Deemed admitted: A matter is admitted unless a written answer or objection signed by the party or its attorney is served within 30 days after service, or a different time is stipulated or ordered (Rule 36(a)(3)).
• Admit or deny: If a matter is not admitted, the answer must specifically deny it or state in detail why the party cannot truthfully admit or deny it (Rule 36(a)(4)).
• Partial answers: When good faith requires, the answer must specify the part admitted and qualify or deny the rest (Rule 36(a)(4)).
• Reasonable inquiry: Lack of knowledge is a permitted reason only if the party states it has made reasonable inquiry and that the information it knows or can readily obtain is insufficient (Rule 36(a)(4)).
• Objections: The grounds must be stated, and a party may not object solely because the request presents a genuine issue for trial (Rule 36(a)(5)).

Objection examples with supporting facts

The three hypotheticals below are invented for this article. Facts, local rules, and judges’ standing orders change what works.

Federal production request

Assume a federal employment case. The plaintiff alleges a failure to promote in one department. The request reads: “Produce all personnel records for all employees from 2015 to the present.”

A response that follows Rule 34(b)(2)(B)–(C) might read:

This response names the excluded scope, supports the burden claim with facts, commits to a production, and includes a withholding statement. Those burden facts have to hold up: if a court asks how the estimate was reached, someone needs an answer.

Federal interrogatory

Assume a personal injury case. The interrogatory asks: “Describe all incidents involving the Premises.”

“Incidents” could mean prior falls, any police call, or any maintenance event. A response might say:

The answer must still be complete for the stated reading, and under Rule 33(b)(3) the unobjectionable portion has to be answered under oath.

California special interrogatory

This example applies CCP §§ 2030.060(f) and 2030.240. Assume the interrogatory asks: “Identify each witness to the incident and state whether each gave a written statement.” A response might read:

California differences to check

California state-court discovery runs on the Code of Civil Procedure (CCP), not the FRCP. These points are intentionally general:

• Scope: CCP § 2017.010 covers nonprivileged matter relevant to the action’s subject matter or a motion, if admissible or reasonably calculated to lead to admissible evidence. This California wording is not the federal Rule 26(b)(1) standard.
• Interrogatories: CCP § 2030.240(a)–(b) requires a clearly stated specific objection and an answer to the unobjectionable remainder. Identify the particular privilege or expressly assert work-product protection.
• Production: CCP § 2031.240(a)–(c) requires a compliance statement or inability-to-comply representation for the unobjectionable remainder, particular identification of responsive items objected to, and the objection’s extent and specific ground. Privilege/work-product claims require sufficient factual information for evaluation, including a privilege log if necessary.
• Special interrogatories: CCP § 2030.060(d), (f) requires each interrogatory to be complete in itself and prohibits subparts and compound, conjunctive, or disjunctive questions in specially prepared interrogatories. Federal Rule 33(a)(1) instead counts discrete subparts toward its limit.
• Admissions: CCP § 2033.230(a)–(b) requires an answer to the unobjectionable remainder and a clearly stated specific objection. Identify the particular privilege or expressly assert work-product protection.

Other states have their own rules. A reference built on federal or California text does not carry over automatically to Texas, Florida, New York, or anywhere else.

Boilerplate and response mistakes to avoid

The quick reference takes the grounds one at a time. These mistakes cut across all of them:

• Legal-conclusion objections: Rule 33(a)(2) says an interrogatory is not objectionable only because it asks for an opinion or contention relating to fact or the application of law to fact, and Rule 36(a)(1) allows requests about the application of law to fact. The label alone needs more. Pure questions of law, or requests that seek counsel’s mental impressions, are a different matter.
• Equal-access assumptions: “Equally available to the propounding party” is not, by itself, a basis to refuse. Rule 26(b)(2)(C)(i) requires a court to limit discovery that is unreasonably cumulative or duplicative, which governs court-imposed limits without displacing timely, supported objections under Rules 33 and 34.
• Confidentiality as a shield: Confidential information is not automatically exempt. Under Rule 26(c)(1)(G), a court may order, for good cause, that a trade secret or confidential commercial information not be revealed or be revealed only in a specified way.
• Unsupported burden: “Unduly burdensome” with no custodians, sources, volume, or effort estimate gives the other side and the court nothing to evaluate.
• Ambiguous “subject to” responses: Answering “subject to and without waiving” leaves the other side guessing whether anything was held back. Rule 34(b)(2)(C) requires production responses to say whether materials are being withheld.
• Generic general objections: A block of objections applied to every request does not satisfy the specificity requirements in Rules 33(b)(4) and 34(b)(2)(B). Tie each objection to its request.

Our guide to discovery responses shows how these issues fit into a complete response.

Deadline and local-order checklist

Before serving, confirm:

• Response deadline: Check the applicable 30-day trigger, any court order, and Rule 29’s limits on stipulated extensions.
• Local rules and standing orders: The district’s local rules and the assigned judge’s procedures may add formatting, numbering, or objection requirements.
• Protective order status: Check whether a stipulated or court-entered order is already in place.
• Electronically stored information (ESI) protocol: Confirm any agreement on form of production and search terms.
• Privilege log timing: Confirm whether the case schedule or an order sets timing and format.
• State-court rules: If the case is in state court, check that state’s own response deadlines and objection rules.

Draft discovery responses with Briefpoint

Briefpoint drafts responses and objections to interrogatories, requests for production, and requests for admission. Output is editable in Microsoft Word, and attorneys keep final review of every response.

Briefpoint also includes Discovery Playbooks. Attorneys review objection and response language against the matter’s facts and governing rules.

For production responses, Autodoc finds responsive documents, adds page-level Bates citations (Bates numbers are page identifiers), and builds a Bates-numbered production package. Attorneys must independently determine what is withheld and ensure the response complies with Rule 34.

Briefpoint supports all 50 states and 98 federal courts. See plan details on the pricing page. Book a demo to see it with your own discovery requests.

Watch a short Briefpoint demo video:

 

FAQs About Discovery Objections Cheat Sheet

What are common objections to interrogatories?

Common objections include relevance and proportionality, overbreadth, undue burden, vagueness, privilege or work product, and exceeding the numerical limit. Under federal Rule 33(b)(4), each ground must be stated with specificity, and under Rule 33(b)(3) the portion not objected to must still be answered under oath. A bare label without supporting facts does not meet that specificity requirement.

What are general objections?

General objections are blanket objections placed at the start of a response and applied to every request. Federal Rules 33(b)(4) and 34(b)(2)(B) require objections to be stated with specificity, and Rule 34(b)(2)(C) requires a statement of whether anything is withheld. Objections tied to a particular request fit those requirements better than a generic block.

Can you object that a request calls for a legal conclusion?

Sometimes, but the label alone is thin. Federal Rule 33(a)(2) says an interrogatory is not objectionable only because it asks for an opinion or contention relating to fact or the application of law to fact, and Rule 36(a)(1) permits admission requests on the application of law to fact. The objection is stronger when it identifies a pure question of law or protected counsel analysis.

What supports an overly broad and unduly burdensome objection?

Concrete facts: the date range, custodians, systems or sources involved, volume, and an explained estimate of the effort required. Rule 26(b)(1) weighs burden or expense against likely benefit in the proportionality analysis. Rule 34(b)(2)(B)–(C) then requires the reasons, the part objected to, a statement of anything withheld, and production of the rest.

How do California discovery objections differ?

California uses its own statutory scope and response requirements. CCP § 2030.240 requires specific interrogatory objections and answers to unobjectionable portions; § 2031.240 addresses identification and privilege information for production objections. Section 2030.060 prohibits subparts and compound questions in specially prepared interrogatories, while § 2033.230 governs admission objections and partial answers.

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.

READ MORE

Clio vs. MyCase: A Complete Comparison Guide

READ MORE

5 Best Legal AI Tools for Accelerated Growth

READ MORE