Judge: Daniel S. Murphy, Case: 23STCV09624, Date: 2024-01-05 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 23STCV09624 Hearing Date: January 5, 2024 Dept: 32
|
MARTA ALICIA VASQUEZ RODRIGUEZ, et al., Plaintiffs, v. MCP MIRADA LLC, et al.,
Defendants.
|
Case No.: 23STCV09624 Hearing Date: January 5, 2024 [TENTATIVE]
order RE: plaintiffs’ motions to compel responses |
|
|
|
BACKGROUND
On April 27, 2023, Plaintiffs filed
this habitability action against Defendants MCP Mirada LLC, Urban Neighborhood
Los Angeles MB LLC, Wilshire Properties Inc., and Property Management
Associates Inc. Plaintiffs consist of eight tenants of an apartment complex,
and Defendants are the alleged owners or managers of the subject property.
Plaintiffs have filed six motions to
compel against Defendants Urban Neighborhood Los Angeles MB LLC and Property
Management Associates Inc., set for hearing on January 5, 8, 10, and 12, 2024. Because
the motions concern identical issues, and Defendants’ opposition argument is
identical for each motion, all of the motions are advanced to this date
(January 5) and heard.
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).) The responding party also waives its
objections. (Id., §§ 2030.290(a), 2031.300(a), 2033.280(a).)
DISCUSSION
Here, the discovery requests were
served on July 20, 2023. (Leon Decl. ¶ 2, Ex. A.) The responses were originally
due on August 21, 2023, but Plaintiffs granted multiple extensions to December
1, 2023. (Id., ¶ 4.) Defendant did not serve responses until December
20, 2023, after the motions were filed. (Anderson Decl. ¶ 11, Ex. D.)
Defendants’ oppositions are limited
to the issue of sanctions. Defense counsel initially requested an extension to
September 13, 2023, which Plaintiffs’ counsel granted. (Leon Decl., Ex. C.) However,
defense counsel inadvertently failed to calendar the due date of the responses.
(Anderson Decl. ¶ 4.) When defense counsel realized the error, he contacted
Plaintiffs’ counsel to request an extension. (Anderson Decl. ¶ 5; Leon Decl., Ex.
C.) Multiple further extensions were granted until the final due date became
December 1, 2023. (Leon Decl., Ex. C.) However, defense counsel fell ill on
November 30, 2023 and was out of work until December 8, 2023. (Anderson Decl.
¶¶ 7-9.) Defendant itself faced challenges compiling responsive documents after
a new compliance manager took over. (Bitzer Decl. ¶ 8.)
Sanctions are warranted for the
delay forcing Plaintiffs to file these motions. However, the Court reduces the
amount based on the mitigating circumstances discussed above. The reasonable
amount is $1,200, representing 3 hours at $400 per hour.
CONCLUSION
Plaintiffs’ motions to compel responses
are GRANTED. Within 10 days, Defendants Urban Neighborhood Los Angeles MB, LLC
and Property Management Associates Inc. shall produce responses to the subject discovery.
The Court sanctions Defendants and their counsel in the total amount of $1,200,
to be paid within 30 days.