Judge Daniel M. Crowley, Case Number: 21STCP03778, Date: 2024-12-03 Tentative Ruling

All parties are urged to meet and confer with all parties concerning this tentative ruling to see if they can reach an agreed-upon resolution of their matter.  If you are able to reach an agreement, please notify the courtroom staff in advance of the hearing if you wish to submit on the tentative ruling rather than argue the motion by notifying the court by e-mailing the court at: SMCDEPT71@lacourt.org. Do not click on the email address, either copy and paste it or type it into your email. Include the word "SUBMITS" in all caps and the Case Number in the Subject line. In the body of the email, please provide the date and time of the hearing, your name, your contact information, the party you represent, and whether that party is a plaintiff, defendant, cross-complainant, cross-defendant, claimant, intervenor, or non-party, etc.

            Please be advised that if you submit on the tentative and elect not to appear at the hearing, the opposing party may still appear at the hearing and argue the matter, and the court could change its tentative based upon the argument.  Unless you receive a submission from all other parties in the matter, you should assume that others might appear at the hearing to argue. If you submit, but still intend to appear, include the words "SUBMITS, BUT WILL APPEAR" in the Subject line.

            If you elect to argue your matter, you are urged to do so remotely, via Court-Connect. If the moving party fails to appear and/or submit to the Court’s tentative ruling, the Court will take the matter off calendar.

            Note that once the Court has issued a tentative, the Court has the inherent authority not to allow the withdrawal of a motion and to adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the court.

If you submitted a courtesy copy of your papers containing media (such as a DVD or thumb drive), unless you request the return of the media in your papers, the court will destroy it following the hearing of your matter.

Petitioner State Farm Automobile Insurance Company’s unopposed motion to compel pro per Respondent Mariam Ahmadi to respond to Petitioner’s Supplemental Interrogatories (Set One) is granted. Respondent is ordered to is ordered to provide Code-compliant responses without objections within 20 days.

Petitioner’s unopposed motion to compel Respondent to respond to Petitioner’s Special Interrogatories (Set Two) is granted. Respondent is ordered to is ordered to provide Code-compliant responses without objections within 20 days.

Petitioner’s unopposed motion to compel Respondent to respond to Petitioner’s Supplemental Request for Production (Set One) is granted. Respondent is ordered to is ordered to provide Code-compliant responses and produce the requested documents without objections within 20 days.

Petitioner State Farm Automobile Insurance Company (“State Farm”) (“Petitioner”) moves unopposed to compel pro per Respondent Mariam Ahmadi (“Ahmadi”) (“Respondent”) to respond to its Supplemental Interrogatories (Set One) (“Supp-Rogs”) that it propounded upon her on March 21, 2024. (Notice of Motion Supp-Rogs, pg. 2; C.C.P. §2030.290.) Petitioner also requests sanctions in the total amount of $810.00 against Petitioner and her counsel, comprised of $750.00 in attorneys’ fees and $60.00 in costs incurred on the instant motion. (Notice of Motion Supp-Rogs, pg. 2.)

Petitioner moves unopposed to compel Respondent to respond to its Special Interrogatories (Set Two) (“SROG”) that it propounded upon her on March 21, 2024. (Notice of Motion SROG, pg. 2; C.C.P. §2030.290.) Petitioner also requests sanctions in the total amount of $810.00 against Petitioner and her counsel, comprised of $750.00 in attorneys’ fees and $60.00 in costs incurred on the instant motion. (Notice of Motion SROG, pg. 2.)

Petitioner moves unopposed to compel Respondent to respond to its Supplemental Request for Production of Documents (Set One) (“RFP”) that it propounded upon her on March 21, 2024. (Notice of Motion Supp-RFP, pg. 2; C.C.P. §2031.300.) Petitioner also requests sanctions in the total amount of $810.00 against Petitioner and her counsel, comprised of $750.00 in attorneys’ fees and $60.00 in costs incurred on the instant motion. (Notice of Motion Supp-RFP, pg. 2.)

On March 21, 2024, Petitioner served Supp-Rogs on Respondent’s counsel, Randall M. Awad (“Awad”). (Decl. of Deenihan ¶3, Exh. A.) Awad has been disbarred effective November 22, 2024. As of the date of this hearing, Petitioner has not received responses to its Supp-Rogs from Respondent. (Decl. of Deenihan ¶5.) Petitioner now moves to compel responses to the Supp-Rogs.

Plaintiff’s motion to compel responses is granted pursuant to C.C.P. §2030.290(b). Respondent is ordered to provide verified responses to Plaintiff’s Supp-Rogs compliant with C.C.P. §§2030.210(a) and 2030.220 without objections within 20 days.

Petitioner requests monetary sanctions totaling $810.00 against Respondent and her counsel. It does not appear Respondent was served with the Supp-Rogs or the instant motion; rather, Awad was served on March 21, 2024, and August 23, 2024, respectively. In light of this fact, the Court determines it would not be in the furtherance of justice to sanction Respondent. Therefore, Petitioner’s request for sanctions is denied.

Having reviewed Petitioner’s unopposed Motion to Compel Responses from Respondent to its SROG, the Court rules as follows:

On March 21, 2024, Petitioner served SROG on Respondent’s counsel, Randall M. Awad (“Awad”). (Decl. of Deenihan ¶3, Exh. A.) Awad has been disbarred effective November 22, 2024. As of the date of this hearing, Petitioner has not received responses to its SROG from Respondent. (Decl. of Deenihan ¶5.) Petitioner now moves to compel responses to the Supp-Rogs.

Plaintiff’s motion to compel responses is granted pursuant to C.C.P. §2030.290(b). Respondent is ordered to provide verified responses to Plaintiff’s SROG compliant with C.C.P. §§2030.210(a) and 2030.220 without objections within 20 days.

Petitioner requests monetary sanctions totaling $810.00 against Respondent and her counsel. It does not appear Respondent was served with the SROG or the instant motion; rather, Awad was served on March 21, 2024, and August 23, 2024, respectively. In light of this fact, the Court determines it would not be in the furtherance of justice to sanction Respondent. Therefore, Petitioner’s request for sanctions is denied.

Having reviewed Petitioner’s unopposed Motion to Compel Responses from Respondent to Petitioner’s RFP, the Court rules as follows:

On March 21, 2024, Petitioner served RFP on Respondent’s counsel, Randall M. Awad (“Awad”). (Decl. of Deenihan ¶3, Exh. A.) Awad has been disbarred effective November 22, 2024. As of the date of this hearing, Petitioner has not received responses to its RFP from Respondent. (Decl. of Deenihan ¶5.) Petitioner now moves to compel responses to the RFP.

Petitioner’s motion to compel responses is granted pursuant to C.C.P. §2031.300(b). Respondent is ordered to provide verified responses to Plaintiff’s RFP and produce documents compliant with C.C.P. §§2031.300(a) and 2031.210 without objections within 20 days.

Hon. Daniel M. Crowley

Judge of the Superior Court