Judge: Anne Hwang, Case: 22STCV27018, Date: 2023-08-22 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV27018    Hearing Date: August 22, 2023    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

MOTION

            This is an action for motor vehicle negligence. Plaintiff Margarita Ballesteros Garcia (“Plaintiff”) now brings this motion to compel Defendant Ian Chavez (“Defendant”) to provide a further response to Plaintiff’s Form Interrogatories, Set One, Form Interrogatory 15.1. Plaintiff also requests monetary sanctions. Defendant has not filed an opposition.

ANALYSIS

Although this motion is listed as a motion to compel initial discovery responses, Plaintiff is requesting that Defendant Chavez provide a further discovery response to Form Interrogatory 15.1. Thus, the motion is a motion to compel further responses.  The Eighth Amended Standing Order for Procedures in the Personal Injury Hub (“Standing Order”) requires that the parties engage in an informal discovery conference prior to litigating a motion to compel further responses. (See Standing Order, § 9E.)

However, in the interest of judicial economy, the Court will address the merits of the motion, despite the moving party’s failure to follow the rules of court. Counsel is admonished to ensure compliance with all court rules in the future.

On November 11, 2022, Plaintiff served Defendant Chavez Form Interrogatories Set 1. (Dunham Decl. Ex. 1.) On January 4, 2023, Defendant served a response. (Dunham Decl. Ex. 2.)

Plaintiff takes issue with one particular discovery response – No. 15.1. This discovery request asked Defendant to “identify each denial of a material allegation and each special or affirmative defense in your pleadings and for each:

(a)   State all all facts upon which you base the denial or special or affirmative defense;

(b)   state the names, ADDRESSES, and telephone numbers of all PERSONS who have knowledge of those facts; and

(c)   identify all DOCUMENTS and other tangible things that support your denial or special or affirmative defense, and state the name, ADDRESS, and telephone number of the PERSON who has each DOCUMENT.

Defendant responded: “This answering Defendant has filed a general denial to an unverified compliant as authorized by the Code of Civil Procedure. This answering defendant's affirmative defenses were set forth in the aforementioned answer and need not be listed here. Said affirmative defenses were pled upon information and belief and on the advice of counsel so they will not be waived pending completion of discovery and discovery is continuing.”

This response is nonresponsive to the discovery request and is not authorized under Code of Civil Procedure § 2030.220. Thus, the motion to compel further discovery is GRANTED.

Plaintiff requests monetary sanctions pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure §§ 2023.010, 2023.300. Plaintiff’s counsel requests $1,100 for 3.5 hours of work at a rate of $300 per hour, plus the filing fee. Given Plaintiff’s failure to attempt to resolve the issue through an informal discovery conference and failure to follow the Court’s Standing Order, the Court declines to award sanctions.

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

The Motion to Compel Further is GRANTED. Defendant is ordered to serve further discovery responses to Form Interrogatory, Set One, No. 15.1 within fifteen (15) days of this order.

The Court DENIES the request for sanctions.

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