(1) AVAILABILITY; PROCEDURES FOR USE. (a) Except as provided in s. 804.015, any party may serve upon any other party written interrogatories to be answered by the party served, or, if the party served is a public or private corporation or a limited liability company or a partnership or an association or a governmental agency or a state officer in an action arising out of the officer’s performance of employment, 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. (am) A party shall be limited, unless otherwise stipulated or ordered by the court in a manner consistent with s. 804.01 (2), to a reasonable number of requests, not to exceed 25 interrogatories, including all subparts. (b) Each interrogatory shall be answered separately and fully in writing under oath, unless it is objected to, in which event the reasons for objection shall be stated in lieu of an answer. The answers are to be signed by the person making them, and the objec- tions signed by the attorney making them. 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. The court may allow a shorter or longer time. The party submitting the interrogatories may move for an order under s. 804.12 (1) with respect to any objection to or other failure to answer an interrogatory.
804.08.Interrogatories to parties.
Ch. 804: Depositions and Discovery · Last amended 2021 · Last verified July 15, 2026
In one sentenceSection 804.08 lets a party serve up to 25 written interrogatories on an opposing party, requires sworn written answers or stated objections within set deadlines, and lets a responding party answer certain interrogatories by pointing to its own business records instead of writing out a narrative answer.
Full Text of Section 804.08
(2) SCOPE: USE AT TRIAL. (a) Interrogatories may relate to any matters which can be inquired into under s. 804.01 (2), and the answers may be used to the extent permitted by chs. 901 to 911. (b) 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 pretrial conference or other later time.
(3) 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:
(a) 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
(b) Giving the interrogating party a reasonable opportunity to examine and audit the records and to make copies, compilations, abstracts, or summaries.
Official Notes
Judicial Council Note, 2010: The meaning of the term “electronically stored information” is described in the Judicial Council Note following Wis. Stat. s. 804.09. Section 804.08 (3) is taken from F.R.C.P. 33(d). Portions of the Committee Note of the federal Advisory Committee on Civil Rules are pertinent to the scope and purpose of s. 804.08 (3): Special difficulties may arise in using electronically stored information, either due to its form or because it is dependent on a particular computer system. Rule 33(d) allows a responding party to substitute access to documents or electronically stored information for an answer only if the burden of deriving the answer will be substantially the same for either party. Rule 33(d) states that a party electing to respond to an interrogatory by providing electronically stored information must ensure that the interrogating party can locate and identify it “as readily as can the party served,” and that the responding party must give the interrogating party a “reasonable opportunity to examine, audit, or inspect” the information. Depending on the circumstances, satisfying these provisions with regard to electronically stored information may require the responding party to provide some combination of technical support, information on application software, or other assistance. The key question is whether such support enables the interrogating party to derive or ascertain the answer from the electronically stored information as readily as the responding party. A party that wishes to invoke Rule 33(d) by specifying electronically stored information may be required to provide direct access to its electronic information system, but only if that is necessary to afford the requesting party an adequate opportunity to derive or ascertain the answer to the interrogatory. In that situation, the responding party’s need to protect sensitive interests of confidentiality or privacy may mean that it must derive or ascertain and provide the answer itself rather than invoke Rule 33(d). [Re Order effective Jan. 1, 2011]
Plain-English Summary
Interrogatories are written questions one party sends another to answer under oath, and Section 804.08 sets the ground rules for using them. A plaintiff can be served after the case starts, and any other party can be served with or after the summons and complaint. Absent a stipulation or court order consistent with Section 804.01(2), a party is limited to a reasonable number of interrogatories, not to exceed 25 including subparts.
Each interrogatory must be answered separately and fully in writing under oath, unless the responding party objects, in which case the reasons for the objection take the place of an answer. The answers are signed by the person who gave them, while any objections are signed by the attorney raising them. The responding party generally has 30 days to serve answers or objections, except that a defendant gets 45 days after being served with the summons and complaint, and the court can shorten or lengthen either deadline. If the responding party won’t answer or objects improperly, the party who sent the interrogatories can move to compel under Section 804.12(1).
Interrogatories can reach any matter within the scope of discovery under Section 804.01(2), and an interrogatory is not objectionable just because the answer calls for an opinion or a contention about how the law applies to the facts, though the court can defer that kind of answer until later in the case. Finally, if answering an interrogatory would require examining or summarizing a party’s business records, and the burden of digging out the answer would fall about equally on either side, the responding party can instead point the other side to the specific records and give a reasonable opportunity to examine, audit, and copy them.
Frequently Asked Questions
How many interrogatories can I serve on another party in a Wisconsin case?
A reasonable number, not to exceed 25 including all subparts, unless the parties stipulate to more or the court orders otherwise consistent with Section 804.01(2).
How long does the other side have to answer interrogatories?
Generally 30 days after service, except a defendant gets 45 days after being served with the summons and complaint. The court can allow a shorter or longer time.
What happens if the other side objects instead of answering an interrogatory?
The reasons for the objection must be stated in place of an answer, and the objection is signed by the attorney raising it. The party who sent the interrogatory can move for an order compelling an answer under Section 804.12(1).
Do interrogatory answers have to be sworn?
Yes. Section 804.08(1)(b) requires each interrogatory to be answered fully in writing under oath, unless it is objected to, and the answers are signed by the person making them.
Can a business answer an interrogatory by just handing over records instead of writing a narrative answer?
Yes, if the answer can be derived from examining, auditing, or summarizing the party’s business records and the burden of doing so would be about the same for either side. The responding party then specifies the records with enough detail to let the interrogating party find them and gives a reasonable chance to examine, audit, and copy them.
Amendment History
History: Sup. Ct. Order, 67 Wis. 2d 585, 676 (1975); 1975 c. 218; 1993 a. 112; 1997 a. 133; Sup. Ct. Order No. 09-01, 2010 WI 67, filed 7-6-10, eff. 1-1-11; 2017 a. 235; 2021 a. 238 s. 45.
Source & verification. Section text and official notes are
reproduced verbatim from the Wisconsin Statutes, published by the
Wisconsin Legislature (Legislative Reference Bureau). Last verified July 15, 2026.
· Official source
Also known as: interrogatories wisconsinROGs wisconsin civil procedurehow many interrogatories allowed wisconsindeadline to answer interrogatories wisconsinbusiness records option interrogatories wisconsin