Judge: Curtis A. Kin, Case: 21STCV30706, Date: 2023-02-28 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 21STCV30706 Hearing Date: February 28, 2023 Dept: 72
MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSES TO FORM
INTERROGATORIES-GENERAL, SET ONE
Date: 2/28/23 (8:30 AM)
Case: Maria Elza Tomaz v. Porsche
Design Studio N. Am, et al. (21STCV30706)
TENTATIVE RULING:
Plaintiff Maria Elza Tomaz’s Motion
to Compel Further Responses to Form Interrogatories-General, Set One is GRANTED
IN PART.
In the moving papers, plaintiff Maria Elza Tomaz moved to
compel further responses from Porsche Cars North America, Inc. to Form Interrogatories-General,
Set One, Nos. 1.1, 3.1, 3.6, 4.1, 4.2, 12.1, 12.4, 12.5, 12.6, 13.1, 13.2,
14.1, 14.2, and 15.1. On December 21, 2022, after the filing of the motion,
defendant served supplemental responses to all the interrogatories at issue except
for Form Interrogatory No. 15.1. (Cabada Decl. ¶ 7 & Ex. E.) In the reply,
plaintiff still seeks a further response to Form Interrogatory No. 15.1, which
asks defendant to state facts, witnesses, and documents supporting its
affirmative defenses.
“[I]f a timely motion to compel has been filed, the burden
is on responding party to justify any objection.” (Fairmont Ins. Co. v.
Superior Court (2000) 22 Cal.4th
245, 255, citing Coy v. Superior Court (1962) 58 Cal.2d 210, 220-21.)
Defendant did not attempt to justify its objections to No. 15.1. Instead,
defendant stated that it was working on a further response. (Cabada Decl. ¶ 9.)
Defendant has not served any supplemental response to No.
15.1. (Livshits Reply Decl. ¶ 2.) To ensure that plaintiff receives a
substantive response to Form Interrogatory No. 15.1, the motion is GRANTED IN
PART. By no later than March 8, 2023, defendant
Porsche Cars North America, Inc. shall serve a further verified response,
without objection, to Form Interrogatories-General, Set One, No. 15.1.
“The court may award sanctions under the Discovery Act in
favor of a party who files a motion to compel discovery, even though . . . the
requested discovery was provided to the moving party after the motion was
filed.” (See Rule of Court 3.1348(a).) Defendant maintains that it only served
objections because plaintiff did not grant defendant an extension of time to
respond. (Cabada Decl. ¶ 6.) However, the interrogatories were served on May
24, 2022. (Livshits Decl. ¶ 3.) Plaintiff granted numerous extensions,
including up to November 23, 2022 to respond to the interrogatories. (Livshits
Decl. ¶¶ 3, 4.) Defendant had six months to provide substantive responses.
Because plaintiff was required to file this motion to obtain
supplemental responses, the Court imposes monetary sanctions against counsel of
record for defendant Porsche Cars North America, Inc. in the amount of $800,
based on one hour to prepare the motion, 0.5 hours reviewing the opposition and
preparing a reply, and 0.5 hours to attend the hearing (instead of the 4.5
hours total that counsel claims), at an hourly rate of $400 (instead of $600
claimed by counsel). Monetary sanctions shall be paid to counsel for plaintiff
within thirty (30) days hereof.