Judge: Daniel M. Crowley, Case: 22STCV16976, Date: 2022-12-15 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV16976    Hearing Date: December 15, 2022    Dept: 28

Defendant Single Room Occupancy Housing Corporation dba Renato Apartments' Motion to Compel Responses to Special Interrogatories; Defendant Single Room Occupancy Housing Corporation dba Renato Apartments’ Motion to Compel Responses to Request for Production of Documents.

Having considered the moving, opposing and reply papers, the Court rules as follows. 

BACKGROUND

On May 23, 2022, Plaintiff Seanpaul Goodlow (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Defendant Single Room Occupancy Housing Corporation dba Renato Apartments (“Defendant”) for negligence and premises liability.

On July 12, 2022, Defendant filed an answer and a Cross-Complaint against Cross-Defendants ROES 1-100 for indemnity, contribution, apportionment of fault, breach of contract regarding duty to defend, breach of contract regarding duty to indemnify and declaratory relief.

On August 26, 2022, Defendant filed Motions to Compel Discovery Responses to be heard on December 15, 2022. On November 15 and 16, 2022, Plaintiff filed an opposition. On December 7, 2022, Defendant filed a reply.

Trial is currently scheduled for November 20, 2023.

PARTY’S REQUESTS

Defendant requests the Court grant the motions to compel responses to special interrogatories, set one, and request for production of documents, set one, within 10 days of the hearing on the motion. Defendant also requests the Court impose sanctions totaling $847.50 for each motion.

Plaintiff requests the Court deny the motions as moot, and not impose sanctions.

LEGAL STANDARD

Under California Code of Civil Procedure § 2031.300, “If a party to whom a demand for inspection, copying, testing, or sampling is directed fails to serve a timely response to it, the following rules shall apply: (b) The party making the demand may move for an order compelling response to the demand.” According to CCP § 2030.260, for a response to interrogatories to be timely, it must be served within 30 days of service.  CCP § 2031.260 provides the same 30-day deadline for request for production responses.

California Code of Civil Procedure § 2023.030(a) provides that “[t]he court may impose a monetary sanction ordering that one engaging in the misuse of the discovery process, or any attorney advising that conduct, or both pay the reasonable expenses, including attorney's fees, incurred by anyone as a result of that conduct.” According to CCP §2023.010(d), misuse of the discovery process includes “failing to respond or to submit to an authorized method of discovery.”

California Code of Civil Procedure § 2030.290(c) states that “the court shall impose a monetary sanction under Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 2023.010) against any party, person, or attorney who unsuccessfully makes or opposes a motion to compel a response to interrogatories, unless it finds that the one subject to the sanction acted with substantial justification or that other circumstances make the imposition of the sanction unjust.”

DISCUSSION

Discovery

On July 12, 2022, Defendant served discovery on Plaintiff. Responses were due on August 15, 2022. Plaintiff did not serve responses to the request for production or special interrogatories prior to the filing of this motion.

Plaintiff served responses on September 27, 2022.

Sanctions

Sanctions are warranted. Defendant is entitled to timely discovery responses. By failing to provide timely, code-compliant responses, Plaintiff has misused the discovery process.

Defendant requests sanctions of $847.50 for each motion, based upon 3.5 hours of attorney’s work, at a rate of $225.00 per hour, and one $60.00 filling fee. 2 hours were spent drafting the motion and 1 hour is anticipated in reading the opposition, drafting a reply and .5 hours attending the hearing on the motion. Both motions are substantially similar and are being heard concurrently. Based on the above, the Court awards sanctions totaling $1,245.00 across both motions, based upon 5 hours of attorney’s work and 2 $60.00 filling fees.

CONCLUSION

Defendant Single Room Occupancy Housing Corporation dba Renato Apartments' Motion to Compel Responses to Special Interrogatories is MOOT. Defendant Single Room Occupancy Housing Corporation dba Renato Apartments’ Motion to Compel Responses to Request for Production of Documents is MOOT.

Defendant Single Room Occupancy Housing Corporation dba Renato Apartments' Request for Sanctions is GRANTED pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure sections 2031.300 and 2030.290.  Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s counsel are ordered to pay Defendant $1,245.00 in sanctions within 30 days of the hearing on the motion.

            Moving party is ordered to give notice of this ruling.

Moving Party is ordered to file the proof of service of this ruling with the Court within five days.

The parties are directed to the header of this tentative ruling for further instructions.