Rule text
(a) Availability. Any party may serve upon any other party written interrogatories, not exceeding the number, including all discrete subparts, set forth in the Case Management Order, 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. Leave of court must be obtained, consistent with the principles stated in C.R.C.P. Rules 16(b)(1) and 26(b) and subsection (e) of this Rule, to serve more interrogatories than the number set forth in the Case Management Order. Without leave of court or written stipulation, interrogatories may not be served before the time specified in C.R.C.P. 26(d).
(b) Answers and Objections. (1) Each interrogatory shall be answered separately and fully, in writing and under oath, unless it is objected to, in which event the objecting party shall state the reasons for objection and shall answer under oath to the extent the interrogatory is not objectionable. An objection must state with specificity the grounds for objection to the interrogatory and must also state whether any responsive information is being withheld on the basis of that objection. A timely objection to an interrogatory stays the obligation to answer those portions of the interrogatory objected to until the court resolves the objection. No separate motion for protective order under C.R.C.P. 26(c) is required. (2) The answers are to be signed by the person making them, and the objections signed by the attorney making them. (3) The party upon whom the interrogatories have been served shall serve a copy of the answers, and objections if any, within 35 days after the service of the interrogatories. 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 pursuant to C.R.C.P. 29. (4) All grounds for an objection to an interrogatory shall be stated with specificity. Any ground not stated in a timely objection will be deemed to be waived unless the party's failure to object is excused by the court for good cause shown. (5) The party submitting the interrogatories may move for an order pursuant to C.R.C.P. 37(a) with respect to any objection to or other failure to answer an interrogatory. (c) Scope; Use at Trial. Interrogatories may relate to any matters which can be inquired into pursuant to C.R.C.P. 26(b), and the answers may be used to the extent permitted by the Colorado 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 pretrial conference or other later time. (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, or from a compilation, abstract, or summary based thereon, 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. (e) Pattern and Non-Pattern Interrogatories; Limitations. The pattern interrogatories set forth in the Appendix to Chapters 1 to 17A, Form 20, are approved. Any pattern interrogatory and its subparts shall be counted as one interrogatory. Any discrete subparts in a non-pattern interrogatory shall be considered as a separate interrogatory.
Notes
Source: (a) to (c) amended and adopted and (e) added and adopted April 14, 1994, effective January 1, 1995, for all cases filed on or after that date; committee comment approved June 10, 1994; (b)(3) amended and adopted December 14, 2011, effective January 1, 2012, for all cases pending on or filed on or after January 1, 2012, pursuant to C.R.C.P. 1(b); (b)(1) and comments amended and adopted May 28, 2015, effective July 1, 2015, for cases filed on or after July 1, 2015; (b)(1), (e), and comments amended and adopted January 12, 2017, effective March 1, 2017.
Cross references: For protective orders concerning discovery, see C.R.C.P. 26(c); for answer to a motion for order compelling discovery, see C.R.C.P. 37(a); for sanctions for failure of party to serve answers to interrogatories, see C.R.C.P. 37(b)(2) and (d).
COMMENTS
1995
[1] Revised C.R.C.P. 33 now interrelates with the differential case management features of C.R.C.P. 16 and C.R.C.P. 26. Because of mandatory disclosure, substantially less discovery is needed. [2] A discovery schedule for the case is required by C.R.C.P. 16(b)(1)(IV). Under the requirements of that Rule, the parties must set forth in the Case Management Order the timing and number of interrogatories and the basis for the necessity of such discovery with attention to the presumptive limitation and standards set forth in C.R.C.P. 26(b)(2). There is also the requirement that counsel certify they have advised their clients of the estimated expenses and fees involved in the discovery. Discovery is thus tailored to the particular case. The parties
in the first instance and ultimately the Court are responsible for setting reasonable limits and preventing abuse.
2017
[1] Pattern interrogatories [Form 20, pursuant to C.R.C.P. 33(e)] have been modified to more appropriately conform to the 2015 amendments to C.R.C.P. 16, 26, and 33. A change to or deletion of a pre-2017 pattern interrogatory should not be construed as making that former interrogatory improper, but instead, only that the particular interrogatory is, as of the effective date of the 2017 rule change, modified as stated or no longer a ''pattern interrogatory.'' [2] The change to C.R.C.P. 33(e) is made to conform to the holding of Leaffer v. Zarlengo, 44 P.3d 1072 (Colo. 2002).