Rule 33.Interrogatories to Parties.

Current through July 1, 2026 · Last verified September 11, 2026

In one sentenceRule 33 allows up to 60 interrogatories counting subparts, answered under oath within 30 days, with objections stated specifically or waived.

Full Text of Rule 33

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

(a) (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) of these Rules.

(b) (b) Answers and objections.

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

(3) (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 of these Rules.

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

(c) (c) Scope; use at trial. Interrogatories may relate to any matters that can be inquired into under Rule 26(b)(1) of these Rules, and the answers may be used to the extent permitted by the Hawaiʻi 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) (d) Option to produce business records. Where the answer to an interrogatory may be derived or ascertained from the business records 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

The Hawaiʻi State Judiciary’s compiled text of this rule carries no amendment order for this rule. For the adopting orders and any later amendments, see the Hawaiʻi State Judiciary’s rules page.

Plain-English Summary

Sixty is the ceiling, and the rule closes the usual loophole: subparts and subquestions count as individual questions. More than that needs leave of court or a written stipulation.

Each interrogatory is answered separately and fully in writing under oath unless objected to, and where an objection is partial the rest must still be answered. Answers are signed by the person making them and objections by the attorney. The response is due within 30 days of service, except that a defendant gets a longer period running from service of the summons and complaint.

Objections carry a real penalty. All grounds must be stated with specificity, and a ground not raised in a timely objection is waived unless the court excuses the failure for good cause. The party who served the interrogatories may move to compel under Rule 37(a).

Interrogatories reach anything within the scope of Rule 26(b)(1), and are not objectionable merely because the answer involves an opinion or a contention relating to fact or the application of law to fact, though the court may defer such an answer. Where the answer can be derived from business records and the burden is substantially the same for either side, the responding party may specify the records in enough detail to let the other party find them.

Frequently Asked Questions

How many interrogatories are allowed in Hawaii family court?

Sixty, counting any subparts or subquestions as individual questions, without leave of court or a written stipulation.

How long do I have to answer interrogatories?

30 days after service, except that a defendant may serve answers or objections within a longer period running from service of the summons and complaint.

What happens if I do not object in time?

The ground is waived, unless the court excuses the failure to object for good cause shown.

Can I object because the question asks for an opinion?

Not on that basis alone. An interrogatory is not objectionable merely because the answer involves an opinion or contention relating to fact or the application of law to fact.

Can I answer by pointing to my records?

Yes, where the answer may be derived from business records and the burden of deriving it is substantially the same for either party, provided the records are specified in enough detail to permit identification.

Source & verification. The rule text is reproduced verbatim from the official Hawaii Family Court Rules (Haw. Fam. Ct. R. 33). Prescribed by the Supreme Court of Hawaii. The plain-English summary is original and written by us. Last verified September 11, 2026. · Official source

Also known as: how many interrogatories hawaii family courtinterrogatory deadline hawaiiobjecting to interrogatories hawaiihawaii family court rule 33