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.

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.