Judge: Cherol J. Nellon, Case: 20STCV36312, Date: 2023-04-14 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 20STCV36312    Hearing Date: April 14, 2023    Dept: 28

Defendant Admiral Pest Control, Inc’s Motion to Compel Plaintiff Amy Melissa Mata’s Responses to Request for Production of Documents; Defendant Admiral Pest Control, Inc’s Motion to Compel Plaintiff Amy Melissa Mata’s Responses to Special Interrogatories; Defendant Anthony Lee Bearden’s Motion to Compel Plaintiff Amy Melissa Mata’s Responses to Request for Production of Documents; Defendant Anthony Lee Bearden’s Motion to Compel Plaintiff Amy Melissa Mata’s Responses to Special Interrogatories

Having considered the moving, opposing, and reply papers, the Court rules as follows.

BACKGROUND

On September 23, 2020, Plaintiff Amy Melissa Mata (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Defendants Admiral Pest Control, Inc (“APC”) and Anthony Lee Bearden (“Bearden”) for negligence and negligence per se.

On October 23, 2020, Defendants filed an answer.

On February 14, 2023, APC filed Motions to Compel Discovery Responses to be heard on March 28 and 30, 2023. The Court continued the hearing on the motion to April 14, 2023.

On February 14, 2023, Bearden filed Motions to Compel Discovery Responses to be heard on March 29, 2023. The Court continued the hearing on the motion to April 14, 2023.

On March 15 and 16, 2023, Plaintiff filed oppositions. On March 21 and 22, 2023, Defendants filed replies.

Trial is currently scheduled for May 2, 2023.

PARTY’S REQUESTS

APC requests the Court compel Plaintiff to provide discovery responses within 10 days of the hearing on the motion. APC also requests the Court impose $1,490.00 in sanctions for failure to serve timely responses.

Plaintiff requests the Court deny the motion.

LEGAL STANDARD

Under California Code of Civil Procedure § 2031.300, “If a party to whom a demand for inspection, copying, testing, or sampling is directed fails to serve a timely response to it, the following rules shall apply: (b) The party making the demand may move for an order compelling response to the demand.” According to CCP § 2030.260, for a response to interrogatories to be timely, it must be served within 30 days of service. CCP § 2031.260 provides the same 30-day deadline for request for production responses.

CCP § 2023.030(a) provides that “[t]he court may impose a monetary sanction ordering that one engaging in the misuse of the discovery process, or any attorney advising that conduct, or both pay the reasonable expenses, including attorney's fees, incurred by anyone as a result of that conduct.” According to CCP §2023.010(d), misuse of the discovery process includes “failing to respond or to submit to an authorized method of discovery.”

CCP § 2030.290(c) states that “the court shall impose a monetary sanction under Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 2023.010) against any party, person, or attorney who unsuccessfully makes or opposes a motion to compel a response to interrogatories, 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.”

DISCUSSION

Discovery

On November 8, 2022, APC and Bearden served Plaintiff with two sets of Request for Production of Documents, Set Six, and Special Interrogatories, Set Three, one from each Defendant. Responses were due by December 12, 2022; an extension was granted to December 23, 2022, for verified responses, without objections. Plaintiff served unverified responses, without objection, on December 22, 2022. At the time of the filing of this motion, Plaintiff had yet to provide verified responses without objections.

Plaintiff states she served unverified responses to all Requests for Production other than Request No. 97 on February 24, 2023, and March 14, 2023. Plaintiff served verifications on March 14, 2023, and filed a “Motion for Relief from Waiver of Objections to Request for Production, Set 6, Request No. 97,” to be heard on April 21, 2023.

Plaintiff also states that on February 24, 2023, she served responses, without objection, to all Special Interrogatories other than Special Interrogatory No. 142. She served verifications on March 15, 2023, and filed a “Motion for Relief from Waiver of Objections to Special Interrogatories, Set 3, Interrogatory No. 142,” to be heard on April 21, 2023.

The Court notes that in the verified versions of the Request for Productions, Plaintiff omitted Requests for Production 92- 97 and 99-106. As these responses, served previously, are unverified, they are tantamount to no response at all.

There are also issues with the most recently served responses for the Special Interrogatories. Plaintiff failed to provide answers to Special Interrogatories 135 and 142. Plaintiff also provided insufficient responses, such as “see Plaintiffs medical records.”

The Court finds that the served responses do not constitute complete, code-compliant, verified responses, without objection. Therefore, the Court grants the motion.

Sanctions

Defendants are entitled to reasonable sanctions due to Defendants’ misuse of the discovery process in failing to provide completed discovery responses.

Defendants seek sanctions of $1,490.00 for each of motion, based on 6.5 hours of attorney’s time at a rate of $220.00 per hour and 1 $60.00 filling fee. 4 hours were spent drafting the motion and 2.5 hours were spent filing the reply and are anticipated for attending the hearing. The Court accounts for the fact that the motions are substantially similar and will be heard concurrently. The Court awards sanctions of $1,340.00 across all motions, based on 5 hours of

attorney’s work. The total is split between the two Defendants, with Plaintiff being ordered to pay $670.00 in sanctions to each Defendant.

CONCLUSION

Defendant Admiral Pest Control, Inc’s Motion to Compel Plaintiff Amy Melissa Mata’s Responses to Request for Production of Documents is GRANTED. Plaintiff is ordered to provide verified, code-compliant responses within 30 days of the hearing on the motion.

Defendant Admiral Pest Control, Inc’s Motion to Compel Plaintiff Amy Melissa Mata’s Responses to Special Interrogatories is GRANTED. Plaintiff is ordered to provide verified, code-compliant responses within 30 days of the hearing on the motion.

Defendant Anthony Lee Bearden’s Motion to Compel Plaintiff Amy Melissa Mata’s Responses to Request for Production of Documents is GRANTED. Plaintiff is ordered to provide verified, code-compliant responses within 30 days of the hearing on the motion.

Defendant Anthony Lee Bearden’s Motion to Compel Plaintiff Amy Melissa Mata’s Responses to Special Interrogatories is GRANTED. Plaintiff is ordered to provide verified, code-compliant responses within 30 days of the hearing on the motion.

Defendant Admiral Pest Control, Inc’s Request for Sanctions is GRANTED. Plaintiff is ordered to pay APC $670.00 in sanctions within 30 days of the hearing on the motion.

Defendant Anthony Lee Bearden’s Request for Sanctions is GRANTED. Plaintiff is ordered to pay Bearden $670.00 in sanctions within 30 days of the hearing on the motion.

Moving party is ordered to give notice of this ruling.

Moving Party is ordered to file the proof of service of this ruling with the Court within five days.

The parties are directed to the header of this tentative ruling for further instructions.