Judge: Colin Leis, Case: 24STCV07305, Date: 2024-10-18 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24STCV07305    Hearing Date: October 18, 2024    Dept: 74

Katrina Surisaday Menchaca Lopez v. FCA US LLC

Plaintiff Katrina Surisaday Menchaca Lopez’s Motions to Compel Initial Discovery.

BACKGROUND 

            Plaintiff Katrina Surisady Menchaca Lopez (Plaintiff) filed a complaint on March 22, 2024 against FCA US LLC (Defendant) and Does 1-100 for product liability. Plaintiff alleges (1) violation of Civil Code § 193.2(d); (2) violation of Civil Code § 193.2(b); (3) violation of Civil Code § 193.2(a)(3); (4) Breach of Express Written Warranty; (5) Breach of Implied Warranty of Merchantability; and (6) Violation of the Tanner Consumer Protection Act.

            On May 20, 2024, Plaintiff propounded Requests for Admission, Set One; Special Interrogatories, Set One; Form Interrogatories, Set One; and, Requests for Document Production, Set One. On July 17, 2024, Plaintiff filed four motions to compel. Defendant provided responses on August 1, 2024.

LEGAL STANDARD

¿¿            If a party to whom interrogatories or inspection demands were directed fails to serve a timely response, the propounding party may move for an order compelling responses.  (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.290(b), 2031.300(b).) Failure to timely serve responses waives objections to the requests.  (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.290(a), 2031.300(a).) The court may relieve a party from waiver of objections if the party served a response that is substantially code compliant and the failure to serve was the result of mistake, inadvertence, or excusable neglect.  (Code Civ. Proc. §§ 2030.290(a), 2031.300(a).)

            If a party to whom requests for admissions were directed fails to serve a timely response, the propounding party may move for an order that the requests for admission are deemed admitted.  (Code Civ. Proc. § 2033.280(a).) The court may relieve a party from the requests being deemed admitted if the party has served a response to the requests that is in substantial compliance.  (Code Civ. Proc. § 2033.280(a).)  The Court may also relieve a party from waiver of objections if the party served a response that is in substantial compliance and the failure to serve was the result of mistake, inadvertence, or excusable neglect. (Code Civ. Proc. § 2033.280(a).) 

DISCUSSION 

            Plaintiff propounded the discovery requests on May 20, 2024. The discovery responses were due on June 19, 2024.  Defendant failed to provide timely discovery responses, but did provide responses on August 1, 2024.  Defendant claims the failure to provide responses was due to Defendant’s counsel’s mistake, inadvertence and excusable neglect.  The Court will relieve Defendant from the waiver of objections. Because Defendant provided code compliant responses to the requests for admission the Court does not deem admitted the Requests for Admission.

            Plaintiff did not request monetary sanctions in her moving papers or the proposed order.

CONCLUSION 

The court grants Plaintiff’s motions to compel but relieves Defendant from waiver of objections and does not deem admitted the requests for admission.

Plaintiff shall give notice.