Group V: Depositions and Discovery · Last amended March 1, 2016 · Last verified July 15, 2026
In one sentenceRule 33 lets a party serve up to 50 written interrogatories on another party, who must answer separately, fully, and under oath within 30 days (45 days for a defendant answering after being served with the summons and complaint).
(1)Timing. A party may serve written interrogatories on the plaintiff after commencement of the action and on any other party after service of the summons and complaint on that party.
(2)Scope. An interrogatory may relate to any matter that may be inquired into under 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.
(3)Number. Unless otherwise stipulated or ordered by the court, a party may serve on any other party no more than 50 written interrogatories. Interrogatory subparts are not counted as separate interrogatories if they are logically or factually subsumed within and necessarily related to the primary question. Leave to serve additional interrogatories may be granted to the extent consistent with Rule 26(b)(1)(B).
(1)Responding party. The interrogatories must be answered:
(A)by the party to whom they are directed;
(B)if that party is a public or private corporation, a partnership, an association, a governmental agency, or any other organization, by any officer or agent, who must furnish the information available to the party.
(2)Time to respond. The responding party must serve its answer and any objections within 30 days after being served with the interrogatories, but a defendant is not required to serve its answer and any objections until 45 days after service of the summons and complaint on it. A shorter or longer time may be stipulated to under Rule 29 or be ordered by the court. Any stipulated extension of time applies to interrogatory answers and objections.
(3)Answering each interrogatory. Each interrogatory must, to the extent it is not objected to, be answered separately and fully in writing under oath. A party must restate the interrogatory being answered immediately preceding its answer to the interrogatory.
(4)Objections. 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.
(5)Signature. The person who makes the answers must sign them, and the attorney who objects must sign any objections.
(6)Repetitive question. A party is not required to answer an interrogatory that is repetitive of any interrogatory it has already answered. An interrogatory served by one party is considered to be served by all parties.
(c)Use. An answer to an interrogatory may be used to the extent allowed by the Rules of Evidence.
(d)Option to produce business records. If the answer to an interrogatory may be determined by examining, auditing, compiling abstracting, or summarizing a party's business records (including electronically stored information), and if the burden of deriving or ascertaining the answer will be substantially the same for either party, the responding party may answer by:
(1)specifying the records that must be reviewed, in sufficient detail to enable the interrogating party to locate and identify them as readily as the responding party could; and
(2)giving the interrogating party a reasonable opportunity to examine and audit the records and to make copies, compilations, abstracts, or summaries.
Explanatory Note
Rule 33 was amended, effective January 1, 1981; September 1, 1983; March 1, 1992 on an emergency basis; July 14, 1993; March 1, 1997; March 1, 2004; March 1, 2008; March 1, 2011; March 1, 2013; March 1, 2016.
Rule 33 was amended, effective March 1, 2011, in response to the December 1, 2007, revision of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The language and organization of the rule were changed to make the rule more easily understood and to make style and terminology consistent throughout the rules.
Paragraph (a)(3) was added, effective March 1, 2013, to limit the number of interrogatories a party may serve. Each party is allowed to serve 50 interrogatories on any other party, but must obtain leave of court (or a stipulation from the opposing party) to serve a larger number. Parties cannot evade this limitation by joining as "subparts" questions that seek information about discrete separate subjects. However, a question asking about communications of a particular type should be treated as a single interrogatory even though it requests that the time, place, persons present, and contents be stated separately for each such communication.
Paragraph (a)(3) was amended, effective March 1, 2016, to define the instances in which a subpart of an interrogatory does not constitute a separate interrogatory.
Paragraph (b)(2) was amended, effective March 1, 2004, to clarify that any stipulated extension applies to answers and objections.
Subdivision (d) was amended, effective March 1, 2008, in response to the 2006 federal revision. The amendments clarify that electronically stored information is a type of business record.
Plain-English Summary
Interrogatories are written questions one party sends another, and Rule 33 sets the ground rules. A party may serve interrogatories on the plaintiff once the action has commenced, and on any other party after that party is served with the summons and complaint. The questions can cover anything within the broad discovery scope of Rule 26(b), and an interrogatory is not objectionable just because it calls for an opinion or a contention about how the law applies to the facts — though the court can put off the answer to that kind of question until a later stage of the case, such as after other discovery closes or at a pretrial conference.
Rule 33(a)(3) caps the number at 50 written interrogatories per party, absent a stipulation or court order allowing more. Subparts of a question do not count separately if they are logically or factually tied to the main question — the official Explanatory Note describes this limit as a response to parties trying to evade the cap by dressing up several distinct topics as “subparts” of one interrogatory, while a question that asks only for the time, place, persons present, and contents of each of several communications of one type still counts as a single interrogatory.
Once served, the responding party has 30 days to answer and object, though a defendant answering interrogatories served along with the summons and complaint gets 45 days from service. Every interrogatory that is not objected to must be answered separately and fully, in writing, under oath, with the question restated immediately before the answer. Objections must state their grounds with specificity, and any ground left out of a timely objection is waived unless the court excuses that failure for good cause. Rule 33(d) also lets a responding party, in the right circumstances, answer by pointing the interrogating party to business records it can review itself rather than compiling a narrative answer, when the burden of extracting the information would be about the same for either side.
Frequently Asked Questions
How many interrogatories can I serve on another party in a North Dakota case?
Rule 33(a)(3) caps the number at 50 written interrogatories per party, unless the parties stipulate to more or the court grants leave to serve additional ones. Subparts logically tied to the main question do not count separately toward that limit.
How long does a party have to answer interrogatories?
Rule 33(b)(2) gives the responding party 30 days after being served to answer and object. A defendant served with interrogatories along with the summons and complaint has 45 days from that service instead of 30, unless the parties stipulate to a different time or the court orders one.
Can I object to an interrogatory just by saying it is objectionable?
No. Rule 33(b)(4) requires the grounds for objecting to be stated with specificity, and any ground not raised in a timely objection is waived unless the court excuses the omission for good cause.
Can I answer an interrogatory by pointing to my business records instead of writing out an answer?
Yes, in the right circumstances. Rule 33(d) allows this when the answer can be derived from business records, including electronically stored information, and the burden of finding the answer would be substantially the same for either party — the responding party must specify the records in enough detail for the other side to locate them and give a reasonable chance to examine and copy them.
Do I have to answer an interrogatory that repeats one I already answered?
No. Rule 33(a)(6) states that a party is not required to answer an interrogatory that repeats one it has already answered, and an interrogatory served by one party is treated as served by all parties.
Source & verification. Rule text and the Explanatory Note are
reproduced verbatim from the North Dakota Rules of Civil Procedure, adopted by the
Supreme Court of North Dakota. Last verified July 15, 2026.
· Official source
Also known as:nd interrogatories rulehow many interrogatories north dakotainterrogatory response deadline north dakotanorth dakota interrogatory subparts limit