• Archives

  • Blog Stats

    • 669,019 hits
  • Categories

Responses to interrogatories under Rule 33 in United States District Court

Responses to interrogatories under Rule 33 in United States District Court are the topic of this blog post. Written interrogatories are governed by Rule 33 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.  Interrogatories in adversary proceedings are also authorized by Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 7033.

The responses to the interrogatories must be served on the propounding party and all other parties to the action within 30 days after service unless otherwise stipulated or ordered by the court. This time period is extended to 33 days if the interrogatories were served by mail.

Rule 33(b)(3) states that, “ Each interrogatory must, to the extent it is not objected to, be answered separately and fully in writing under oath.”

And any grounds for objecting to an interrogatory must be stated with specificity as any not grounds for objection that are not stated in a timely fashion will be waived unless otherwise ordered by the court on a showing of good cause. Rule 33(b)(4).

It should be stressed that the Federal courts in particular are notoriously intolerant of generic or “boilerplate” objections that are interposed without any supporting facts. Examples include “vague and ambiguous” where no details are provided as to why the interrogatory is vague and ambiguous. The use of boilerplate objections with no supporting facts may result in the imposition of monetary sanctions as well as waiver of the objections.

The responses must be signed under oath and the attorney must sign any response that contains any objections.

Attorneys or parties who would like to view a portion of a sample 10 page responses to interrogatories in United States District Court under Rule 33 containing brief instructions for responding, a generic verification under oath with notary acknowledgment for use in most states, a specific verification for California only, and proof of service by mail sold by the author can see below.

The author of this blog post, Stan Burman, is an entrepreneur and freelance paralegal who has worked in California and Federal litigation since 1995 and has created over 300 sample legal documents for California and Federal litigation.

*Do you want to use this article on your website, blog or e-zine? You can, as long as you include this blurb with it: “Stan Burman is the author of over 300 sample legal documents for California and Federal litigation and is the author of a free weekly legal newsletter. You can receive 10 free gifts just for subscribing. Just visit http://freeweeklylegalnewsletter.gr8.com/ for more information.

Follow the author on Twitter at: https://twitter.com/LegalDocsPro

You can view sample legal document packages for sale by visiting: http://www.legaldocspro.com/downloads.aspx


Please note that the author of this blog post, Stan Burman is NOT an attorney and as such is unable to provide any specific legal advice. The author is NOT engaged in providing any legal, financial, or other professional services, and any information contained in this blog post is NOT intended to constitute legal advice.

The materials and information contained in this blog post have been prepared by Stan Burman for informational purposes only and are not legal advice. Transmission of the information contained in this blog post is not intended to create, and receipt does not constitute, any business relationship between the author and any readers. Readers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel.


What is your opinion?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: