Judge: Daniel S. Murphy, Case: 21STCV40146, Date: 2023-01-11 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV40146    Hearing Date: January 11, 2023    Dept: 32

BACKGROUND

            On November 1, 2021, Molly First and Colby Audette (collectively “Plaintiffs” or “Cross-Defendants”) filed this action against Sparkle S. Blount, individually and as Trustee of the Toni Rose Family Trust (“Defendant” or “Cross-Complainant”), alleging (1) specific performance, (2) breach of contract, and (3) fraud.

            The action stems from a residential purchase agreement (the “Agreement”) between Plaintiffs and Defendant whereby Defendant was to sell the real property located at 2142 S. Sycamore Ave., Los Angeles, CA 90016 (the “Property”) to Plaintiffs. Defendant allegedly reneged on the Agreement by refusing to sell the Property to Plaintiffs.

            On April 29, 2022, Defendant filed a cross-complaint against Plaintiffs and various cross-defendants, alleging that she was fraudulently induced into the sales agreement.  

            On December 16, 2022, Plaintiff Molly First filed the instant motions to compel Defendant to provide verifications to her responses to form interrogatories and requests for production. Defendant has not filed an opposition.  

LEGAL STANDARD

Discovery responses are due 30 days after service of the requests, unless the parties stipulate or the court orders otherwise. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.260(a), 2031.260(a), 2033.250(a).) If a responding party fails to respond in time, the propounding party may move for an order compelling the responses or deeming matters admitted. (Id., §§ 2030.290(b), 2031.300(b), 2033.280(b).) Unverified responses are tantamount to no response at all. (See Appleton v. Super. Ct. (1988) 206 Cal.App.3d 632, 636.)

DISCUSSION

            Plaintiff served the discovery on February 7, 2022, and Defendant served responses on March 9, 2022 without verifications. (Haven Decl. ¶¶ 3-4.) “The party to whom the [requests] are directed shall sign the response under oath unless the response contains only objections.” (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.250(a), 2031.250(a).) Defendant’s responses contain more than objections. (Haven Decl., Ex. 2.) Defendant has still not provided verifications despite multiple requests. (Id., ¶ 6.) Without an opposition, Defendant concedes the merits of the motion and fails to provide any substantial justification for her failure to comply with discovery.

            While sanctions are warranted, the amount requested is excessive given the simplicity of the motions and lack of opposition. The reasonable amount is $945, representing 3 hours at $275 per hour, plus $120 in filing fees for two motions.

CONCLUSION

            Plaintiff Molly First’s motions to compel verifications are GRANTED. Defendant is to provide verifications to the subject discovery responses within 10 days. Sanctions are awarded against Defendant in the amount of $945, to be paid within 30 days.