IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE ___ CIRCUIT
STATE OF HAWAIʻI
[STYLE OF CASE – e.g., JOHN DOE, Plaintiff, v. ACME, INC., Defendant]
Civil No. [CASE NUMBER]
PLAINTIFF’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO DEFENDANT [DEFENDANT NAME]
[// GUIDANCE: Tailor caption to match the court and division in which the matter is pending.]
TABLE OF CONTENTS
- Preliminary Statement
- Governing Authority
- General Instructions
- Definitions
- Interrogatories Nos. 1 – [XX]
- Verification
- Certificate of Service
1. PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
Plaintiff [PLAINTIFF NAME] (“Plaintiff”), pursuant to Rules 26 and 33 of the Hawaiʻi Rules of Civil Procedure (“HRCP”) and subject to the limitations set forth herein, propounds the following interrogatories (“Interrogatories”) to Defendant [DEFENDANT NAME] (“Defendant”). Defendant must serve written answers and any objections, verified under oath, within thirty (30) days after service of these Interrogatories, except that a defendant who has not yet answered the complaint shall have forty-five (45) days from the date of service. See HRCP 33(b)(3).
[// GUIDANCE: Substitute earlier or later response periods only by written stipulation or court order, HRCP 29.]
2. GOVERNING AUTHORITY
These Interrogatories are propounded under and shall be construed in accordance with:
• HRCP 26 (discovery scope, supplementation, and privilege log requirements);
• HRCP 29 (stipulations regarding discovery procedure); and
• HRCP 33 (interrogatories to parties).
3. GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS
3.1 Duty to Supplement. Pursuant to HRCP 26(e), Defendant must seasonably supplement all responses if Defendant learns the response was incomplete or incorrect in any material respect.
3.2 Form of Answers. Each answer shall:
a. Restate verbatim the corresponding Interrogatory immediately before the answer;
b. Be made separately, fully, and under oath by an authorized representative with personal knowledge or by reference to records produced contemporaneously pursuant to HRCP 33(c); and
c. Identify by Bates number any documents relied upon.
3.3 Privilege and Work-Product. If any information is withheld on the basis of privilege or work-product protection, Defendant shall:
a. State the specific privilege asserted; and
b. Provide a privilege log that complies with HRCP 26(b)(5), sufficiently describing the nature of the withheld material to allow assessment of the claim.
3.4 Objections. For any objection, state with specificity the grounds and respond to all non-objectionable portions. A general or blanket objection is improper.
3.5 Computation of Limits. Hawaiʻi does not impose a numerical limit on interrogatories by rule. Nonetheless, Plaintiff has limited this set to [XX] discrete Interrogatories, each of which shall be construed as a single interrogatory notwithstanding subparts logically or factually subsumed within the primary question. [// GUIDANCE: Reduce or expand count as appropriate. Excessive interrogatories may invite a protective-order motion under HRCP 26(c).]
3.6 Time Frame. Unless otherwise specified, each Interrogatory seeks information from the earliest relevant date through the present.
4. DEFINITIONS
For purposes of these Interrogatories, the following definitions apply (capitalized terms have the same meaning wherever used):
4.1 “Action” means the above-captioned lawsuit.
4.2 “Communication” means every manner or form of disclosure, exchange, or transfer of information, whether oral, written, electronic, or otherwise, including text messages, emails, social-media direct messages, and telephone calls.
4.3 “Concerning,” “relating to,” or “regarding” mean referring to, describing, evidencing, or constituting, directly or indirectly.
4.4 “Date” means the exact day, month, and year, or the best available approximation.
4.5 “Document” has the broadest meaning under HRCP 34 and includes electronically stored information (“ESI”).
4.6 “Identify” or “Identification”:
a. Natural Person – full name, present or last-known address, telephone number, and employer or business affiliation;
b. Entity – full name, address of principal place of business, and form of organization;
c. Document – title, author, addressees, date, type, and Bates range.
4.7 “You,” “Your,” “Defendant,” or “ACME” means Defendant [DEFENDANT NAME], its present and former officers, directors, employees, agents, attorneys, and all other persons acting or purporting to act on its behalf.
[// GUIDANCE: Expand or narrow definitions to fit the factual posture and proportionality considerations.]
5. INTERROGATORIES
Interrogatory No. 1
Identify all persons who participated in preparing the answers to these Interrogatories, specifying each person’s name, title, current employer, and the Interrogatories for which that person supplied information.
Interrogatory No. 2
Describe in detail the factual basis for each affirmative defense asserted in Your answer, including identification of all Documents and Communications that support each such defense.
Interrogatory No. 3
State the total amount of damages, offsets, or credits You contend should be applied against Plaintiff’s claims, and describe the methodology used to compute such amounts.
Interrogatory No. 4
Identify every individual with knowledge of any fact alleged in the Complaint or in Your answer, specifying the subject matter of each individual’s knowledge.
Interrogatory No. 5
Describe the policies, procedures, or guidelines in effect during the Relevant Period that relate to [SUBJECT MATTER], and identify all Documents that constitute, embody, or evidence such policies.
Interrogatory No. 6
For each Communication between You and Plaintiff during the Relevant Period concerning the subject matter of this Action, state: (a) the date; (b) the participants; (c) the mode of Communication; and (d) the substance of the Communication.
Interrogatory No. 7
Identify and describe all internal investigations or reviews conducted by You relating to the allegations in the Complaint, including the individuals involved and the conclusions reached.
Interrogatory No. 8
If You contend that any third party is wholly or partially responsible for the damages alleged by Plaintiff, identify that third party and describe in detail the basis for Your contention.
Interrogatory No. 9
State all insurance agreements under which any person carrying on an insurance business may be liable to satisfy part or all of a judgment entered in this Action, or to indemnify or reimburse for payments made to satisfy such judgment.
Interrogatory No. 10
Describe with particularity every category of electronically stored information maintained by You that is potentially relevant to this Action, including custodians, data sources, retention periods, and any steps taken to preserve such ESI.
[// GUIDANCE: Insert additional interrogatories as warranted, maintaining proportionality. Each interrogatory should be narrowly tailored to elicit material information without imposing undue burden under HRCP 26(b)(1).]
6. VERIFICATION
I, [NAME OF AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE], hereby declare under penalty of perjury that I am duly authorized to make this verification for and on behalf of Defendant [DEFENDANT NAME]; that I have read the foregoing Answers to Interrogatories; and that the answers contained therein are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief.
Date: _
Location: _
[NAME]
[Title]
[DEFENDANT NAME]
7. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on this ___ day of [MONTH], [YEAR], a true and correct copy of the foregoing Plaintiff’s First Set of Interrogatories to Defendant [DEFENDANT NAME] was served via [SPECIFY METHOD – e.g., Hand Delivery/E-Mail] upon:
[Opposing Counsel Name]
[Law Firm]
[Address]
[E-mail]
[ATTORNEY NAME], Esq.
[Hawaiʻi Bar No.]
Counsel for Plaintiff [PLAINTIFF NAME]
[// GUIDANCE: HRCP 5(b)(2)(E) permits service by electronic means if the recipient consents in writing.]
PRACTICAL NOTES & RISK MANAGEMENT
- Discovery Limits. Hawaiʻi imposes no rigid numerical cap on interrogatories, but courts enforce proportionality. Keep the total reasonable (e.g., ≤ 40), or seek leave of court if additional interrogatories are essential.
- Response Deadlines. Default periods (30/45 days) run from service date. Calendar carefully; stipulate to extensions in writing where cooperative discovery is advantageous.
- Privilege Log. A deficient log invites waiver arguments. Ensure compliance with HRCP 26(b)(5) and include sufficient detail to evaluate each claim without revealing privileged content.
- ESI Considerations. Hawaiʻi courts increasingly expect early discussion of ESI protocols. Interrogatory No. 10 sets the stage for a Rule 26(f) conference focused on preservation and production formats.
- Verification. Failure to verify may render answers inadmissible. Confirm that the signatory has adequate personal knowledge or access to information reasonably available to the party.
- Objections. Boilerplate objections (e.g., “vague, ambiguous, overbroad, and burdensome”) are disfavored. Articulate specific grounds and describe the extent, if any, of responsive information withheld.
[// GUIDANCE: Review local circuit court rules for any additional, judge-specific discovery requirements or standing orders.]
End of Template.