RulesofCivilProcedure.com Civil Procedure · Every State

§ 2033.260.Extension of time to response; agreement of parties; notice

Title 4. Civil Discovery Act · Chapter 16. Requests for Admission · Article 2. Response to Requests for Admission · Enacted 2004 · no amendments on record · Last verified July 29, 2026

In one sentenceSection 2033.260 lets the requesting and responding parties agree to extend the deadline to respond to some or all requests for admission in a set beyond the statutory period, requires that agreement be confirmed in writing specifying the new date, preserves the responding party's response options unless the agreement says otherwise, and requires notice of the agreement to all other served parties.

Full Text of § 2033.260

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

(a) The party requesting admissions and the responding party may agree to extend the time for service of a response to a set of admission requests, or to particular requests in a set, to a date beyond that provided in Section 2033.250.
(b) This agreement may be informal, but it shall be confirmed in a writing that specifies the extended date for service of a response.
(c) Unless this agreement expressly states otherwise, it is effective to preserve to the responding party the right to respond to any request for admission to which the agreement applies in any manner specified in Sections 2033.210, 2033.220, and 2033.230.
(d) Notice of this agreement shall be given by the responding party to all other parties who were served with a copy of the request.

Plain-English Summary

Rather than forcing every extension of the response deadline through a court motion, this section lets the parties handle it themselves by agreement. The requesting party and the responding party can agree to push the deadline for a response, to an entire set of requests for admission or just to particular ones within it, beyond the date Section 2033.250 would otherwise require.

The negotiation behind that agreement does not have to be formal, but the agreement itself has to end up confirmed in writing that specifies the new, extended date. That writing requirement avoids later disputes over whether an extension was granted at all, or how long it ran. Unless the agreement expressly says otherwise, agreeing to a later date does not narrow the responding party's options: it still preserves the right to respond in any manner Sections 2033.210, 2033.220, and 2033.230 would normally allow, whether that means admitting, denying, or objecting. And the responding party has to give notice of the agreement to every other party who was served with a copy of the original requests, so nobody else in the case is left unaware that the deadline has moved.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can the parties agree to extend the request-for-admission response deadline without a court order?

Yes. Section 2033.260 lets the requesting and responding parties agree between themselves to a later response date.

Does the extension agreement have to be in writing?

Yes. While the negotiation can be informal, the agreement itself must be confirmed in writing specifying the extended date.

Does agreeing to an extension limit how the responding party can eventually respond?

No, not unless the agreement expressly says so. The responding party keeps the right to respond in whatever manner Sections 2033.210 through 2033.230 otherwise allow.

Who must be told about an agreement to extend the response deadline?

All other parties who were served with a copy of the requests for admission.

Amendment History

(Added by Stats.2004, c. 182 (A.B.3081), § 23, operative July 1, 2005.)

Source & verification. Section text is reproduced verbatim from the West's Annotated California Codes / Thomson Reuters. Enacted by the California Legislature. Last verified July 29, 2026. · Official source
Also known as: ccp 2033.260 agreement to extend request for admission responsestipulation extend time respond admission californiawritten agreement extending admission deadline