Judge: David A. Hoffer, Case: 30-2021-1186981, Date: 2022-10-03 Tentative Ruling

I.  Motion to Compel Response to First Set of Form Interrogatories Against Real Estate Xperts

The unopposed motion of plaintiff Thelma Calabio for an order compelling defendant Real Estate Xperts, Inc. to respond to the first set of form interrogatories without objection and imposing a monetary sanction of $1,155 against defendant and its attorney of record is GRANTED except that the sanction award is reduced to $600. 

Plaintiff has shown that she served the first set of form interrogatories by electronic service on former defense counsel on June 9, 2021 (Exhibit 1 to moving papers) and that defendant served a response on April 25, 2022 that only contained an answer to form interrogatory 17.1 (Exhibit 4 to moving papers).

Within 20 days of this hearing, defendant is ordered provide a verified response, without objections, that answers all of the interrogatories in the set.

Further, defendant and its counsel of record are ordered to pay sanctions of $600 within 60 days of this hearing.  Code Civ. Proc. § 2030.290(b) and (c).

II.  Motion to Compel Response to First Set of Form Interrogatories Against Sunil Kirit Mehta

The unopposed motion of plaintiff Thelma Calabio for an order compelling defendant Sunil Kirit Mehta to respond to the first set of form interrogatories without objection and imposing a monetary sanction of $1,155 against defendant and defendant’s attorney of record is GRANTED except that the sanction awarded is reduced to $600.  

Plaintiff has shown that plaintiff served the first set of form interrogatories by electronic service on former defense counsel on June 9, 2021 (Exhibit 1 to moving papers) and that defendant served a response on April 25, 2022 that only contained an answer to form interrogatory 17.1 (Exhibit 4 to moving papers).

Within 20 days of this hearing, defendant is ordered provide a verified response, without objections, that answers all of the interrogatories in the set.

Further, defendant and defendant’s counsel of record are ordered to pay sanctions of $600 within 60 days of this hearing.  Code Civ. Proc. § 2030.290(b) and (c).

III.  Motion to Compel Third Party Compliance with Deposition Subpoena

The motion of plaintiff Thelma Calabio for an order compelling third-party Michelle Carrigan to comply with a deposition subpoena for the production of business records served by plaintiff and for an order that Carrigan pay a monetary sanction of $1,485 is DENIED without prejudice to a future motion that complies with the Rules of Court. 

Plaintiff did not personally serve the moving papers on the third-party witness as required by CRC 3.1346.  (“A written notice and all moving papers supporting a motion to compel an answer to a deposition question or to compel production of a document or tangible thing from a nonparty deponent must be personally served on the nonparty deponent unless the nonparty deponent agrees to accept service by mail or electronic service at an address or electronic service address specified on the deposition record.”)  Without proof of such service, the Court cannot grant this motion.

IV.  Motion to Compel Further Compliance with Response to Requests for Production Against Sunil Mehta

The motion of plaintiff Thelma Calabio for an order compelling defendant Sunil Mehta to comply with the response to the plaintiff’s first set of requests for production and produce responsive documents in defendant’s possession, custody, or control and imposing a monetary sanction is GRANTED except sanctions are reduced to $600. 

Under Code Civ. Proc. § 2031.320(a), if a party who serves a response to a set of requests for production thereafter fails to permit the inspection, copying, testing or sampling demanded as stated in the party’s statement of compliance, the demanding party may move for an order compelling compliance.   Under subdivision (b) of section 2031.320, the Court must impose a monetary sanction against any party, person, or attorney who unsuccessfully makes or opposes a motion to compel compliance with a demand, 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.

Moving party has shown that defendant agreed to produce documents in his possession, custody, or control that were responsive to all of the requests but that he has not produced all such documents.  Thus, the court grants the motion.

Within 20 days of this hearing, defendant is ordered to provide additional documents responsive to the requests made and the responses provided.

Further, defendant and defendant’s counsel of record are ordered to pay sanctions of $600 within 60 days of this hearing.

The plaintiff is ordered to provide notice of these rulings.