Judge: Christopher K. Lui, Case: 24STCV01422, Date: 2024-10-29 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24STCV01422    Hearing Date: October 29, 2024    Dept: 76

The following tentative ruling is issued pursuant to Rule of Court 3.1308 at 1:59 p.m. on October 25, 2024. 

Notice of intent to appear is REQUIRED pursuant to California Rule of Court 3.1308(a)(1).  The Court does not desire oral argument on the motion addressed herein. 

8As required by Rule 3.1308(a)(1), any party seeking oral argument must notify ALL OTHER PARTIES and the staff of Department 76 by 4:00 p.m. on October 28, 2024.

Notice to Department 76 may be sent by email to smcdept76@lacourt.org or telephonically at 213-830-0776.

Per Rule of Court 3.1308, if notice of intention to appear is not given, oral argument will not be permitted.

            Plaintiff Strategic Funding Source, Inc. d/b/a Kapitus, a New York corporation moves for an order deeming admitted requests for admission as against Defendant William Sutherland Jr.

TENTATIVE RULING

            Plaintiff Strategic Funding Source, Inc. d/b/a Kapitus, a New York corporation’s motion for an order deeming admitted requests for admission as against Defendant William Sutherland Jr. is GRANTED. Plaintiff did not request the imposition of any sanctions.

ANALYSIS

Motion To Deem Admitted Requests For Admission           

            Plaintiff Strategic Funding Source, Inc. d/b/a Kapitus, a New York corporation moves for an order deeming admitted requests for admission.

When a party to whom a request for admissions are directed fails to respond, under Civ. Proc. Code, § 2033.280(b) a party propounding the request for admission may move for an order that the truth of any matters specified in the request be deemed admitted.  “The court shall make this order [deem admitted], unless it finds that the party to whom the request for admissions have been directed has served, before the hearing on the motion, a proposed response to the request for admission that is in substantial compliance with section 2033.220.” (Civ. Proc. Code, § 2033.280(c).) 

There is no meet and confer requirement prior to bringing a motion to deem admitted requests for admission. Defendant William Sutherland did not serve timely responses, or any response, as of the filing of this motion. (Motion at Page 1: 17-20.) As such, Plaintiff is entitled to an order deeming admitted the matters set forth in the requests for admission.

The motion is GRANTED. Plaintiff did not request any sanctions.