Judge: Audra Mori, Case: 19STCV31148, Date: 2022-12-16 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 19STCV31148    Hearing Date: December 16, 2022    Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

Defendant Calin Stoica (“Defendant”) propounded form interrogatories and request for production of documents (“RPDs”), all set one, on each of Plaintiffs Nicolas Barbieri (“Barbieri”) and Keonta Beasley (“Beasley”) on July 13, 2021.  To date, despite attempts to meet and confer, neither Barbieri nor Beasley has served responses.  Defendant therefore seeks an order compelling Barbieri and Beasley to each respond, without objections, to the outstanding discovery and to pay sanctions.

Defendant’s motions are unopposed and granted.  Plaintiffs Barbieri and Beasley are each ordered to serve verified responses to form interrogatories, sets one, and RPDs, sets one, without objections, within ten days.  (CCP §§ 2030.290(a), (b), 2031.300(a), (b).)

Sanctions are mandatory unless the party subject to sanctions acted with substantial justification or other circumstances make the imposition of sanctions unjust.  (CCP §§ 2030.290(c), 2031.300(c).)  Defendant seeks sanctions in the amount of $760 for each motion against Plaintiffs.  However, Defendant does not describe any conduct warranting sanctions against either Barbieri or Beasley personally.  Rather, the evidence shows that the discovery requests were served on, and the meet and confer attempts were made with, Plaintiffs’ counsel, but Plaintiffs’ counsel did not respond to such.  No sanctions are requested against Plaintiffs’ counsel, and none are awarded. 

            As a final note, the Court realizes that each of Defendant’s motion to compel form interrogatories, and to compel request for RPDs is actually two motions combined into one: (a) motion to compel responses to form interrogatories, set one, against Barbieri, (b) motion to compel form interrogatories, set one, against Beasley, (c) motion to compel RPDs, set one, against Barbieri, and (d) motion to compel RPDs, set one, against Beasley.  In the future, moving party is ordered to obtain separate hearing reservations and pay separate filing fees.  Combining multiple motions under the guise of one motion with one hearing reservation manipulates the Court Reservation System and unfairly jumps ahead of other litigants.  Moreover, combining motions to avoid payment of separate filing fees deprives the Court of filing fees it is otherwise entitled to collect.

Be that as it may, in the absence of any objection by Plaintiffs and lack of any showing of prejudice, and in light of the fact that no sanctions are being awarded, the Court will exercise its discretion to hear all the motions without requiring the payment of additional fees for the instant motions. 

Defendant is ordered to give notice. 

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE:

• Parties are encouraged to meet and confer after reading this tentative ruling to see if they can reach an agreement.
• If a party intends to submit on this tentative ruling, the party must send an email to the court at sscdept31@lacourt.org with the Subject line “SUBMIT” followed by the case number.  The body of the email must include the hearing date and time, counsel’s contact information, and the identity of the party submitting.  
• Unless all parties submit by email to this tentative ruling, the parties should arrange to appear remotely (encouraged) or in person for oral argument.  You should assume that others may appear at the hearing to argue.  
• If the parties neither submit nor appear at hearing, the Court may take the motion off calendar or adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the Court.  After the Court has issued a tentative ruling, the Court may prohibit the withdrawal of the subject motion without leave. 

Dated this 16^th day of December 2022