Rule 33.Interrogatories to Parties.

Last amended January 1, 2015 · Last verified July 3, 2026

In one sentenceRule 33 lets a party send up to 60 written questions to another party, who must answer them under oath or state a reason for objecting.

Full Text of Rule 33

Text sizeJump to: (a) (b) (c) (d)

(a) Availability. Without leave of court or written stipulation, any party may serve upon any other party written interrogatories, not exceeding 60 in number, counting any subparts or subquestions as individual questions, to be answered by the party served or, if the party served is a public or private corporation or a partnership or association or governmental agency, by any officer or agent, who shall furnish such information as is available to the party. Interrogatories may, without leave of court, be served upon the plaintiff after commencement of the action and upon any other party with or after service of the summons and complaint upon that party. Leave to serve additional interrogatories shall be granted to the extent consistent with the principles of Rule 26(b)(2).

(b) Answers and Objections.

(1) Each interrogatory shall be answered separately and fully in writing under oath, unless it is objected to, in which event the objecting party shall state the reasons for objection and shall answer to the extent the interrogatory is not objectionable.

(2) The answers are to be signed by the person making them, and the objections signed by the attorney making them.

(3) The party upon whom the interrogatories have been served shall serve a copy of the answers, and objections if any, within 30 days after the service of the interrogatories, except that a defendant may serve answers or objections within 45 days after service of the summons and complaint upon that defendant. A shorter or longer time may be directed by the court or, in the absence of such an order, agreed to in writing by the parties subject to Rule 29.

(4) All grounds for an objection to an interrogatory shall be stated with specificity. Any ground not stated in a timely objection is waived unless the party's failure to object is excused by the court for good cause shown.

(5) The party submitting the interrogatories may move for an order under Rule 37(a) with respect to any objection to or other failure to answer an interrogatory.

(c) Scope; Use at Trial. Interrogatories may relate to any matters which can be inquired into under Rule 26(b)(1), and the answers may be used to the extent permitted by the rules of evidence. An interrogatory otherwise proper is not necessarily objectionable merely because an answer to the interrogatory involves an opinion or contention that relates to fact or the application of law to fact, but the court may order that such an interrogatory need not be answered until after designated discovery has been completed or until a pre-trial conference or other later time.

(d) Option to Produce Business Records. Where the answer to an interrogatory may be derived or ascertained from the business records, including electronically stored information, of the party upon whom the interrogatory has been served or from an examination, audit or inspection of such business records, including a compilation, abstract or summary thereof, and the burden of deriving or ascertaining the answer is substantially the same for the party serving the interrogatory as for the party served, it is a sufficient answer to such interrogatory to specify the records from which the answer may be derived or ascertained and to afford to the party serving the interrogatory reasonable opportunity to examine, audit or inspect such records and to make copies, compilations, abstracts or summaries. A specification shall be in sufficient detail to permit the interrogating party to locate and to identify, as readily as can the party served, the records from which the answer may be ascertained.

End

Amendment History

Amended May 15, 1972, effective July 1, 1972

further amended July 26, 1990, effective September 1, 1990

further amended May 7, 2004, effective July 1, 2004

further amended August 29, 2014, effective January 1, 2015

Plain-English Summary

Without leave of court or a written stipulation, a party may serve written interrogatories on any other party, capped at 60 questions counting subparts as separate questions, once the case has started against the party being asked. The answering party, or an officer or agent if that party is a corporation or agency, must answer each question separately and under oath or state the grounds for objecting, and must answer to the extent the question isn't objectionable. Answers and objections are due within 30 days of service, or 45 days for a defendant's first response, though the court or a written party agreement can shorten or lengthen that window. Every ground for objecting must be stated specifically, and any ground left out of a timely objection is waived unless the court excuses it for good cause.

The questions asked can reach anything discoverable under Rule 26(b)(1), and the answers can be used at trial to the extent the rules of evidence allow; an interrogatory isn't objectionable just because answering it calls for an opinion or requires applying law to fact. When the answer can be found in business records just as easily by the party asking as by the party asked, Rule 33(d) lets the responding party point to those records instead of answering directly, so long as it identifies them in enough detail for the other side to locate and use them.

Frequently Asked Questions

How many interrogatories can a party send?

Up to 60, counting each subpart or subquestion as a separate question, though the parties can stipulate in writing to more, and the court must grant leave for additional interrogatories to the extent consistent with the discovery-proportionality principles in Rule 26(b)(2).

How long does the other side have to answer?

30 days after service generally, or 45 days for a defendant's first response, unless the court or a written agreement between the parties sets a different deadline.

Can a party answer by pointing to its business records instead of writing out an answer?

Yes, under the business-records option in Rule 33(d), when the burden of finding the answer is substantially the same for both sides and the responding party specifies the records in enough detail to locate them.

Source & verification. The rule text and History are reproduced verbatim from the official Hawaii Rules of Civil Procedure (Haw. R. Civ. P. 33). Prescribed by the Supreme Court of Hawaii (Haw. Rev. Stat. § 602-11; Haw. Const. art. VI, § 7). The plain-English summary is original and written by us. Last verified July 3, 2026. · Official source

Also known as: written interrogatoriesROGs hawaiiquestions to other partyinterrogatory limit sixty