Judge: Anne Hwang, Case: 21STCV05943, Date: 2024-02-20 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 21STCV05943 Hearing Date: February 20, 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
| 
   DEPT:  | 
  
   32  | 
 
| 
   HEARING DATE:  | 
  
   February
  20, 2024  | 
 
| 
   CASE NUMBER:  | 
  
   21STCV05943  | 
 
| 
   MOTIONS:    | 
  
   (1)
  Compel Responses to Form Interrogatories, Set One (2)
  Compel Responses to Special Interrogatories, Set One  | 
 
| 
   MOVING PARTY:  | 
  
   Defendant
  Environmental Service Concepts, LLC   | 
 
| 
   OPPOSING PARTY:  | 
  
   Unopposed  | 
 
BACKGROUND
            Defendant Environmental Service
Concepts, LLC (Defendant) moves to compel Plaintiff Mercedes Penaherrera
(Plaintiff) to serve verified responses, without objections, to Form
Interrogatories, Set One and Special Interrogatories, Set One. Defendant seeks monetary
sanctions against Plaintiff and her counsel. No opposition has been filed. 
LEGAL
STANDARD
If a party to whom interrogatories are directed fails to serve a
timely response, the propounding party may move for an order compelling
responses. (Code Civ. Proc. § 2030.290 (b).) Failure to timely respond waives
all objections, including privilege and work product, unless “[t]he party has
subsequently served a response that is in substantial compliance” and “[t]he
party’s failure to serve a timely response was the result of mistake,
inadvertence, or excusable neglect.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.290 (a)(1),
(a)(2).) The statute contains no time limit for a motion to compel where no
responses have been served and no meet and confer is required when a party does
not respond to discovery requests. All that need be shown in the moving papers
is that a set of interrogatories was properly served on the opposing party,
that the time to respond has expired, and that no response of any kind has been
served. (Leach v. Superior Court (1980) 111 Cal.App.3d 902, 905-906.) 
If a motion to compel responses is filed, the Court shall impose a
monetary sanction against the losing party “unless it finds that the one
subject to the sanction acted with substantial justification or that other
circumstances make the imposition of the sanction unjust.” (Code Civ. Proc., §§
2030.290 (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
Here, Defendant served Form Interrogatories, Set One and Special
Interrogatories, Set One, on Plaintiff on July 27, 2022. (Gharzeddine Decl. ¶ 4,
Exh. A.) Since then, no responses have been served. (Id. ¶ 7.)  Therefore, because responses have not been
served, the motions to compel are granted. 
Defendant also
requests $319.98 in monetary sanctions for each of the two motions. This represents
an hourly rate of $155.00 and the $61.65 filing fee. (Id. ¶ 10.) The Court
finds sanctions are warranted because Plaintiff has failed to respond. 
CONCLUSION
AND ORDER
Accordingly, Defendant’s Motions to Compel Form Interrogatories, Set
One and Special Interrogatories, Set One are GRANTED. Plaintiff Mercedes
Penaherrera shall provide verified responses, without objection, within 15
days.
The Court further GRANTS Defendant’s request for monetary sanctions
against Plaintiff Mercedes Penaherrera and her attorney of record, jointly and
severally, in the amount of $639.96. Said monetary sanctions are to be paid
to counsel for Defendant within 30 days of the date of this order.
Defendant
shall provide notice of the Court’s order and file a proof of service of such.