Interrogatories in Federal Court

Interrogatories in Federal Court are the topic of this blog post.

Interrogatories in Federal Court are the topic of this blog post.

Interrogatories are permitted in civil litigation in both Federal District Courts as well as  Bankruptcy Courts pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP). While depositions are also permitted the use of other discovery methods is often more cost effective.

Interrogatories are very useful for obtaining the facts, witnesses and existence of documents that support the opposing party's claims or defenses. They are also particularly useful in obtaining facts and information when a party wishes to take a deposition, but does not want to do so until pertinent facts and information have been ascertained.

The scope of discovery under FRCP Rule 26(b) is very broad. "Parties may obtain discovery regarding any nonprivileged matter that is relevant to any party's claim or defense - including the existence, description, nature, custody, condition, and location of any documents or other tangible things and the identity and location of persons who know of any discoverable matter. For good cause, the court may order discovery of any matter relevant to the subject matter involved in the action. Relevant information need not be admissible at the trial if the discovery appears reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence."

Interrogatories in Federal Court are permitted pursuant to Rule 33 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. However, unless leave of court is obtained a party may serve on any other party no more than 25 written interrogatories, including all discrete subparts. Some courts may have local rules that further restrict the number of written interrogatories.

An interrogatory may relate to any matter that may be inquired into under FRCP Rule 26(b). 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, but the court may order that the interrogatory need not be answered until designated discovery is complete, or until a pretrial conference or some other time.

The responding party must serve its answers and any objections within 30 days after being served with the interrogatories. Each interrogatory must, to the extent it is not objected to, be answered separately and fully in writing under oath.

The grounds for objecting to an interrogatory must be stated with specificity. Any ground not stated in a timely objection is waived unless the court, for good cause, excuses the failure.

The person who makes the answers must sign them, and the attorney who objects must sign any objections.

Sample interrogatories in Federal Court for sale.

Attorneys or parties who would like to view a portion of sample written interrogatories under rule 33 that are sold by the author can see below.

Sample Written Interrogatories for United States District Court by Stan Burman on Scribd

 

Attorneys or parties that would like more information on a Federal legal document collection containing over 50 sample documents including written interrogatories in Federal Court sold by the author can use the link shown below.

https://legaldocspro.myshopify.com/collections/frontpage/products/federal-legal-document-collection

The author of this blog post, Stan Burman, is a freelance paralegal who has worked in California and Federal litigation since 1995. Visit the author's website at: http://www.legaldocspro.net

If you enjoy this blog post, tell others about it. They can subscribe to the author’s weekly California legal newsletter by visiting the following link: http://www.legaldocspro.net/newsletter.htm

Copyright 2012 Stan Burman. All rights reserved.

DISCLAIMER:

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.

These 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.