Judge: Daniel M. Crowley, Case: 24STCV03443, Date: 2024-12-06 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 24STCV03443 Hearing Date: December 6, 2024 Dept: 71
County of
Los Angeles
DEPARTMENT 71
TENTATIVE
RULING
|
DULCE LOPEZ-RIVERA, et al.,
vs. ROSALINA R. PAYES, et al. |
Case No.: 24STCV03443 Hearing Date: December 6, 2024 |
Defendants Rosalina R. Payes’, Bryan J. Garcia’s, and Reginaldo D.
Garcia’s unopposed motion to compel Plaintiff Dulce
Lopez-Rivera, individually and as GAL for Nicole Luna, to provide responses to their Form Interrogatories
(Set One) is granted. Plaintiff Dulce Lopez-Rivera, individually
and as GAL for Nicole Luna is ordered to provide verified responses without
objections within 20 days.
Defendants
Rosalina R. Payes’, Bryan J. Garcia’s, and Reginaldo D. Garcia’s request for monetary sanctions on the motion
to compel responses for their Form Interrogatories (Set One) is granted in the reduced amount of $217.50
against Plaintiff Dulce Lopez-Rivera, individually and as GAL for Nicole
Luna and her attorney, Margaret M. Kame, Esq. of Mark H. Aprahamian, P.C.,
jointly and severally. Sanctions are payable within 20 days.
Defendants
Rosalina R. Payes’, Bryan J. Garcia’s, and Reginaldo D. Garcia’s unopposed
motion to compel Plaintiff Dulce Lopez-Rivera, individually and as GAL for
Nicole Luna, to provide responses to their Request for Production (Set One) is granted. Plaintiff Dulce Lopez-Rivera, individually
and as GAL for Nicole Luna, is ordered to provide verified responses and
produce documents without objections within 20 days.
Defendants
Rosalina R. Payes’, Bryan J. Garcia’s, and Reginaldo D. Garcia’s request for monetary sanctions on the motion
to compel responses for their Request for Production (Set One) is granted in the reduced amount of $217.50 against
Plaintiff Dulce Lopez-Rivera, individually and as GAL for Nicole Luna
and her attorney, Margaret M. Kame, Esq. of Mark H. Aprahamian, P.C., jointly
and severally. Sanctions are payable within 20 days.
Defendants Rosalina
R. Payes (“Payes”), Bryan J. Garcia (“Bryan”), and Reginaldo D. Garcia (“Reginaldo”)
(collectively, “Defendants”) move unopposed to compel Plaintiff Dulce
Lopez-Rivera, individually and as GAL for Nicole Luna (“Lopez-Rivera”) (“Plaintiff”)
to
provide responses to their Form Interrogatories (Set One) (“FROG”). (Notice of Motion FROG, pg. 2; C.C.P. §§2030.210,
et seq.) Defendants also request an
award of sanctions against Plaintiff and her counsel Margaret M. Kame, Esq. of
Mark H. Aprahamian, P.C., jointly and severally, in the amount of $1,310.00. (Notice of Motion FROG, pg. 2; C.C.P. §§2023.030,
2030.290.)
Defendants move unopposed
to compel Plaintiff to provide responses to their Request for Production (Set
One) (“RFP”). (Notice of Motion RFP, pg.
2; C.C.P. §§2031.210, et seq.) Defendants
also request an award of sanctions against Plaintiff and her counsel Margaret
M. Kame, Esq. of Mark H. Aprahamian, P.C., jointly and severally, in the amount
of $1,310.00. (Notice of Motion RFP, pg.
2; C.C.P. §§2023.030, 2031.300.)
Having reviewed Defendants’ unopposed Motion to Compel Responses
from Plaintiff to their FROG, the Court rules as follows:
On May 20, 2024, Defendants
served FROG on Plaintiff. (Decl. of Lajevardi
¶¶4-5, Exh. 1.) On June 21, 2024,
Plaintiff requested a 30-day discovery extension to respond to discovery. (Decl. of Lajevardi ¶4.) On June 26, 2024, Defendants received
Plaintiff’s discovery responses with a pending verification. (Decl. of
Lajevardi ¶4.) Plaintiff did not provide
the signed verifications and still has not provided the verified responses to
this day. (Decl. of Lajevardi ¶5.) Defendants now moves to compel responses to
the FROG.
Defendants’ motion to compel responses is granted pursuant to C.C.P. §2030.290(b). Plaintiff is ordered to provide verified
responses to Plaintiff’s FROG compliant with C.C.P. §§2030.210(a) and 2030.220 without
objections within 20 days.
Defendants request monetary sanctions totaling $1,310.00 against Plaintiff and her counsel.
Since the instant motion is unopposed, the Court declines to grant
sanctions for anticipated fees for reviewing the opposition and preparing a
reply.
(1.5 hours to prepare instant motion x $250.00) + $60.00 filing fee = $435.00/2
motions = $217.50
The sanctions are payable by
Plaintiff and her attorney, jointly and severally, within 20 days of this
order.
Moving Party is to give
notice of this ruling.
2.
Motion to Compel RFP
Having reviewed Defendants’ unopposed
Motion to Compel Responses from Plaintiff to their RFP, the Court rules as
follows:
On May 20, 2024, Defendants served RFP on Plaintiff. (Decl. of Lajevardi ¶¶4-5, Exh. 1.) On June 21, 2024, Plaintiff requested a
30-day discovery extension to respond to discovery. (Decl. of Lajevardi ¶4.) On June 26, 2024, Defendants received
Plaintiff’s discovery responses with a pending verification. (Decl. of
Lajevardi ¶4.) Plaintiff did not provide
the signed verifications and still has not provided the verified responses to
this day. (Decl. of Lajevardi ¶5.) Defendants now moves to compel responses to
the RFP.
Defendants’ motion to compel
responses is granted pursuant to C.C.P. §2031.300(b). Plaintiff
is ordered to provide verified responses to Defendants’ RFP and produce
documents compliant with C.C.P. §§2031.300(a) and 2031.210 without objections
within 20 days.
Plaintiff requests monetary
sanctions totaling $1,310.00 against Plaintiff and her
counsel. Since the instant motion is
unopposed, the Court declines to grant sanctions for anticipated fees for
reviewing the opposition and preparing a reply.
The Court awards sanctions pursuant to C.C.P. §2031.300(c) in the amount of $217.50,
calculated as follows:
(1.5 hours to prepare instant motion x $250.00) + $60.00 filing fee =
$435.00/2 motions = $217.50
The sanctions are payable by
Plaintiff and her attorney, jointly and severally, within 20 days of this
order.
Moving Party is to give
notice of this ruling.
Dated: December
_____, 2024
|
|
|
Hon. Daniel M. Crowley |
|
Judge of the Superior Court |