Judge: Craig Griffin, Case: Allen vs. Chopra, Date: 2023-08-28 Tentative Ruling

Plaintiff Deanna Lynn Allen’s (“Plaintiff”) unopposed Motion to Deem Requests for Admission, Set One (“RFA”), as Admitted (“Motion”) and for sanctions against defendant Palak Chopra (“Defendant”) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.

If a party fails to serve timely responses to RFA, then all objections are waived.  (Civ. Proc. Code § 2033.280(a).)  “The requesting party may move for an order that the genuineness of any documents and the truth of any matters specified in the requests be deemed admitted, as well as for a monetary sanction . . .”  (Civ. Proc. Code § 2033.280(b).) 

Monetary sanctions are mandatory against a party whose failure to serve a timely response to RFA necessitated a motion.  (Civ. Proc. Code § 2033.280(c); Civ. Proc. Code § 2023.010(d).)

Plaintiff appears to have served both the RFA and the Motion on Chopra at the address Chopra (in pro per) listed on his Answer to the First Amended Complaint.  Chopra did not serve any responses to the RFA and has not responded to the Motion. 

The Motion is GRANTED, and the RFA are hereby deemed admitted.

Pursuant to Civ. Proc. Code § 2033.280(c) and Civ. Proc. Code § 2023.010(d), the court also GRANTS the requested monetary sanctions, against Defendant and in favor of Plaintiff, in the reasonable amount of $1,192.50. 

Plaintiff requests terminating sanctions pursuant to Civ. Proc. Code § 2023.030(d).  In reviewing the totality of the circumstances, Chopra’s failure to respond to the first sets of written discovery requests is the first discovery abuse on the part of Chopra.  While the failure to respond may be willful, there is no history of abuse, nor is there any evidence at this time that less severe sanctions would not produce compliance with the discovery rules.  (Los Defensores, Inc. v. Gomez (2014) 223 Cal. App. 4th 377, 390.)  Given discovery sanctions must be imposed in incrementally, it would not be appropriate for this court to jump to terminating sanctions at the first violation.  (Dep't of Forestry & Fire Prot. v. Howell (2017) 18 Cal. App. 5th 154, 191-92.) 

The request for terminating sanctions is DENIED.

Plaintiff to give notice.