Judge: Anne Hwang, Case: 20STCV29949, Date: 2024-08-01 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 20STCV29949    Hearing Date: August 1, 2024    Dept: 32

PLEASE NOTE:   Parties are encouraged to meet and confer concerning this tentative ruling to determine if a resolution may be reached.  If the parties are unable to reach a resolution and a party intends to submit on this tentative ruling, the party must send an email to the Court at sscdept32@lacourt.org indicating that party’s intention to submit.  The email shall include the case number, date and time of the hearing, counsel’s contact information (if applicable), and the identity of the party submitting on this tentative ruling.  If the Court does not receive an email indicating the parties are submitting on this tentative ruling and there are no appearances at the hearing, the Court may place the motion off calendar or adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the Court.  If all parties do not submit on this tentative ruling, they should arrange to appear in-person or remotely.  Further, after the Court has posted/issued a tentative ruling, the Court has the inherent authority to prohibit the withdrawal of the subject motion and adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the Court. 

TENTATIVE RULING

BACKGROUND

Plaintiff moves to compel Defendants Kenneth Russell and Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority to provide verified responses to Requests for Production of Documents, Set Two. Defendants respond and Plaintiff replies.

LEGAL STANDARD

Requests for Production 

Under Code of Civil Procedure Section 2031.300, if a party fails to serve a timely response to a demand for inspection, the party making the demand may move for an order compelling response to the demand. (Code Civ. Pro § 2031.300 (b).) The party who fails to serve a timely response to a demand for inspection waives any objection to the demand unless the court finds that the party has subsequently served a response that is in substantial compliance or party’s failure was the result of mistake, inadvertence, or excusable neglect. (Code Civ. Proc. § 2031.300 (a)(1)- (2).)  

Courts shall impose a monetary sanction against any party who unsuccessfully makes or opposes a motion to compel a response to a demand for inspection unless the party acted with substantial justification or other circumstances make the imposition of the sanction unjust. (Code Civ. Proc. § 2031.300 (c).) Further, “[t]he court may award sanctions under the Discovery Act in favor of a party who files a motion to compel discovery, even though no opposition to the motion was filed, or opposition to the motion was withdrawn, or the requested discovery was provided to the moving party after the motion was filed.” (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1348(a).) 

DISCUSSION

On January 23, 2024, Plaintiff served Requests for Production of Documents, Set Two on Defendants. Defendants served an objection on February 26, 2024. Plaintiff re-served the discovery requests on May 9, 2024. Defendants received an extension and served responses on June 14, 2024 which consisted solely of objections.

Unverified discovery responses are tantamount to no response at all, and are subject to a motion to compel responses (rather than a motion to compel further responses).¿ (Appleton v. Superior Court (1988) 206 Cal. App. 3d 632, 635-36.)¿¿However, the party to whom interrogatories and requests for production are directed shall sign the response under oath unless the responses contain only objections. (Code Civ. Proc. §§ 2030.250(a), 2031.250(a).)

Here, because Defendants’ responses contained objections, signed by counsel, a motion to compel is not appropriate, but rather motions to compel further under Code of Civil Procedure sections 2030.300 and 2031.310, which requires the moving party to meet and confer, schedule an informal discovery conference, and file a separate statement.

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

Therefore, the Court continues the motions to August 22, 2024 at 1:30 p.m. An informal discovery conference is set for August 14, 2024 at 11:00 a.m. Plaintiff shall promptly meet and confer with Defendants by telephone or in person and submit a joint status report advising the Court whether any issues have been resolved, by August 12, 2024. A courtesy of the joint report must be delivered to Department 32 by 4:00 p.m. on August 13.

Plaintiff shall provide notice of the Court’s order and file a proof of service of such.