Judge: Christopher K. Lui, Case: 24STCV05131, Date: 2024-06-04 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24STCV05131    Hearing Date: June 4, 2024    Dept: 76

The following tentative ruling is issued pursuant to Rule of Court 3.1308 at 2:58 p.m. June 3, 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. 

As 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 June 3, 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 Hyun J Kang’s motion to compel responses to form interrogatories is MOOT by virtue of verified responses having been served before the hearing on this motion. If Plaintiff seeks further responses, Plaintiff may bring an appropriate motion.

Plaintiff’s request for sanctions against Defendant and Defendant’s attorneys of record, jointly and severally, is GRANTED in the reduced amount of $810. Sanctions are to be paid to Plaintiff’s counsel within 30 days.

ANALYSIS

Motions To Compel Responses To Form Interrogatories

            Plaintiff moves to compel responses to form interrogatories and requests the imposition of sanctions.

When a party to whom interrogatories are directed fails to respond, under Civ. Proc. Code, § 2030.290(b) a party propounding the interrogatories may move for an order compelling a response. A party who fails to provide a timely response waives any objection, including one based on privilege or work product. (Civ. Proc. Code, § 2030.290(a).) For a motion to compel initial responses, no meet and confer is required. All that needs to be shown 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. Sup. Ct. (1980) 111 Cal.App.3d 902, 905-06.)

On May 3, 2024, Defendant served unverified[1] responses to form interrogatories, with objections. Responses were due on April 30, 2024. Due to the untimely response, Defenant has waived all objections. Civ. Proc. Code, § 2030.290(a).) If Defendant seeks relief from waiver of objections, Defendant must bring a properly-notice motion in that regard.

As such, the motion to compel responses to form interrogatories is MOOT by virtue of verified responses having been served before the hearing on this motion. If Plaintiff seeks further responses, Plaintiff may bring an appropriate motion.

The 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 Court, Rule 3.1348(a).)

Plaintiff’s request for sanctions against Defendant and Defendant’s attorneys of record, jointly and severally, is GRANTED in the reduced amount of $810 (2 hours at $350, plus $60 filing fee—Declaration of Sena Hori, ¶ 4.) Sanctions are to be paid to Plaintiff’s counsel within 30 days.