Judge Andrew E. Cooper, Case Number: 23CHCV03785, Date: 2025-01-28 Tentative Ruling

JANUARY 27, 2025

(Form Interrogatories, Special Interrogatories, Requests for Admission, and

Requests for Production of Documents, Set One)

Los Angeles Superior Court Case # 23CHCV03785

MOVING PARTY: Defendant 22125 Roscoe Corp dba Topanga Terrace, erroneously named as Topanga Terrace Rehabilitation and Subacute (“Defendant”)

RELIEF REQUESTED: Orders compelling Plaintiff’s responses to Defendant’s Form Interrogatories, Special Interrogatories, and Requests for Production of Documents (“RFPs”), Set One, and deeming the matters in Defendant’s Requests for Admission (“RFAs”), Set One, admitted.

TENTATIVE RULING: The unopposed motions are granted. Plaintiff is ordered to provide objection-free responses to Defendant’s first set of discovery requests within 30 days. The matters in Defendant’s RFAs, Set One, are deemed admitted.

This is medical malpractice action in which Plaintiff alleges that on 12/18/22, while she was a patient under the care of Defendant’s rehabilitation facility, she was injured when an unnamed defendant John Doe improperly transferred her from a commode to a wheelchair, causing her to fall to the ground. (Compl. ¶ 8.)

On 12/13/23, Plaintiff filed her complaint, alleging against the Defendant the following causes of action: (1) Medical Negligence; and (2) Negligence. On 6/3/24, Defendant filed its answer.

On 6/3/24, Defendant served its first set of discovery requests on Plaintiff. (Decl. of Christina E. Batshoun ¶ 2.) On 9/5/24, Defendant filed the instant motions to compel Plaintiff’s responses thereto. No oppositions have been filed to date.

A propounding party may move for an order compelling a response to interrogatories if the responding party fails to serve a timely response within 30 days. (Code Civ. Proc. §§ 2030.290, subd. (b); 2030.260, subd. (a).) Furthermore, the responding party who fails to serve a timely response “waives any right to exercise the option to produce writings under Section 2030.230, as well as any objection to the interrogatories, including one based on privilege or on the protection for work product” unless the Court grants it relief upon motion. (Code Civ. Proc. § 2030.290, subd. (a).)

A propounding party may move for an order compelling a response to a request for production of documents if the responding party fails to serve a timely response within 30 days. (Code Civ. Proc. §§ 2031.300, subd. (b); 2031.260, subd. (a).) Furthermore, the responding party who fails to serve a timely response “waives any objection to the demand, including one based on privilege or on the protection for work product” unless the Court grants it relief upon motion. (Code Civ. Proc. § 2031.300, subd. (a).)

A propounding party may move for an order deeming the genuineness of any documents and the truth of any matters specified in the requests be deemed admitted if the responding party fails to serve a timely response within 30 days. (Code Civ. Proc. §§ 2033.280, subd. (b); 2033.250, subd. (a).) Furthermore, the responding party who fails to serve a timely response “waives any objection to the requests, including one based on privilege or on the protection for work product” unless the Court grants it relief upon motion. (Code Civ. Proc. § 2033.280, subd. (a).) “The court shall make this order, unless it finds that the party to whom the requests for admission have been directed has served, before the hearing on the motion, a proposed response to the requests for admission that is in substantial compliance with Section 2033.220.” (Id. at subd. (c).)

Here, as Defendant electronically served its first set of discovery requests on Plaintiff on 6/3/24, the last day for Plaintiff to respond was 7/5/24. (Code Civ. Proc. § 1010.6, subd. (a)(3)(B).) Despite having been granted one extension to respond, Plaintiff has not provided responses to the subject discovery requests to date. (Batshoun Decl. ¶¶ 3–6.) As such, Plaintiff has waived any objections to the discovery requests.

The Court notes that Plaintiff has failed to oppose the instant motions. Accordingly, the Court grants the instant unopposed motions to compel Plaintiff’s objection-free responses to the subject discovery requests.

The unopposed motions are granted. Plaintiff is ordered to provide objection-free responses to Defendant’s first set of discovery requests within 30 days. The matters in Defendant’s RFAs, Set One, are deemed admitted.