Judge: David B. Gelfound, Case: 22CHCV00610, Date: 2025-05-01 Tentative Ruling

Counsel wishing to submit on a tentative ruling may inform the clerk or courtroom assistant in North Valley Department F49, 9425 Penfield Ave., Chatsworth, CA 91311, at (818) 407-2249.  Please be aware that unless all parties submit, the matter will still be called for hearing and may be argued by any appearing/non-submitting parties. If the matter is submitted on the court's tentative ruling by all parties, counsel for moving party shall give notice of ruling. This may be done by incorporating verbatim the court's tentative ruling. The tentative ruling may be extracted verbatim by copying and pasting, as unformatted text, from the Los Angeles Superior Court’s website, http://www.lasuperiorcourt.org.
All hearings on law and motion and other calendar matters are generally NOT transcribed by a court reporter unless one is provided by the party(ies). 

Case Number: 22CHCV00610    Hearing Date: May 1, 2025    Dept: F49

LOS ANGELES SUPERIOR COURT

NORTH VALLEY DISTRICT

DEPARTMENT F49

MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION, SET ONE; REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS

Motion filed: 1/9/25

MOVING PARTY: Defendant Henry Mayo Newhall Memorial Hospital

RESPONDING PARTY: None.

NOTICE: OK.

RELIEF REQUESTED: An order from this Court to compel Plaintiff Robert Devries to respond to Defendant Henry Mayo Newhall Memorial Hospital’s Requests for Production of Documents, Set One, without objection, and to impose monetary sanctions against Plaintiff in the amount of $510.00.

TENTATIVE RULING: The motion is GRANTED. The request for monetary sanctions is GRANTED IN PART.

BACKGROUND

This is a medical malpractice case.

On August 8, 2022, Plaintiff Robert Devries (“Plaintiff” or “Devries”) initiated the action by filing a Complaint against Defendant Henry Mayo Newhall Memorial Hospital (“Defendant” or “Henry Mayo Hospital”) and Does 1 to 50, alleging a single cause of action for medical negligence/medical malpractice. On July 9, 2024, Plaintiff filed a proof of service, demonstrating that summons and complaint were served upon Defendant on July 6, 2024, via personal service. On July 31, 2024, Defendant Henry Mayo Hospital filed its Answer to the Complaint.

On January 9, 2025, Henry Mayo Hospital filed the instant Motion to Compel Responses to Request for Production, Set One (the “Motion”).

No Opposition or Reply papers have been filed.

ANALYSIS

If a party to whom a demand for inspection, copying, testing, or sampling is directed fails to serve a timely response to it, the party making the demand may move for an order compelling response to the demand. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.300, subd. (b).)

Additionally, “[The party to whom the demand for inspection, copying, testing, or sampling is directed waives any objection to the demand, including one based on privilege or on the protection for work product under Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 2018.010) ....” (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.300, subd. (a).)

A.    Motion to Compel Responses to Requests for Production of Documents, Set One

Henry Mayo Hospital’s counsel, Tony Hsu (“Hsu”), attests that on July 31, 2024, Henry Mayo Hospital served its Requests for Production of Documents, Set One, on Plaintiff. (Hsu Decl. ¶ 3, Ex. “C.”) The deadline for Plaintiff’s responses to the Requests for Production of Documents, Set One, was due on August 31, 2024. (Id. ¶ 4.) On October 29, 2024, Hsu spoke with Plaintiff on the phone and was told that discovery responses would be provided at Plaintiff’s deposition scheduled for October 30, 2024. (Id. ¶¶ 5-6.) However, during the deposition on October 30, 2024, Plaintiff informed Hsu that he had not started on the written discoveries and would complete them after the deposition. (Ibid.) Subsequently, on November 7, 26, and December 4, 2024, Hsu emailed Plaintiff requesting responses to written discoveries. However, no responses from Plaintiff were received. (Id. ¶ 7.) On December 6 and 9, 2024, Hsu left voicemails for Plaintiff requesting responses. Despite the efforts, no responses were received from Plaintiff. (Id. ¶¶ 8-9.) Eventually, on December 13, 2024, Plaintiff provided a hardcopy of his initial unverified responses. (Id. ¶ 10, Ex. “B.”) Following this, on December 14, 2024, and January 1, 2025, Hsu followed up with Plaintiff, requesting verification and addressing the deficiencies. However, no further responses have been received from Plaintiff as of the date of filing of the Motion. (Id. ¶¶ 11-13.)  

The law is clear that unverified discovery responses are tantamount to no response at all and are subject to a motion to compel responses, rather than a motion to compel further responses.  (Appleton v. Superior Court (1988) 206 Cal. App. 3d 632, 635-36.)

Based on the above records, the Court determines that Plaintiff has failed to serve a timely response, thereby waiving any objections to the requests, including those based on privilege or the protection for work product, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 2031.300, subdivision (a).

Nevertheless, under Code of Civil Procedure section 2031.300, subdivision (a), “[t]he court, on motion, may relieve that party from this waiver on its determination that both of the following conditions are satisfied: ¶ (1) The party has subsequently served a response that is in substantial compliance with Sections 2031.210, 2031.220, 2031.230, 2031.240, and 2031.280. ¶ (2) The party’s failure to serve a timely response was the result of mistake, inadvertence, or excusable neglect.”

Here, Plaintiff did not file an Opposition to the Motion. Nor did Plaintiff move separately for relief from the waiver. Additionally, there is no record indicating any responses have been subsequently served by Plaintiff prior to the hearing.

Accordingly, the Court finds that relief under Code of Civil Procedure section 2031.300, subdivision (a), is unavailable in these circumstances.

Based on the foregoing, the Court GRANTS the unopposed Motion.

B.     Monetary Sanctions

Defendant Henry Mayo Hospital requests the imposition of monetary sanctions against Plaintiff in the amount of $510.00. (Mot. at p. 6; Hsu Decl. ¶ 16.)

Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 2031.300, subdivision (c), “[t]he 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 a demand for inspection, copying, testing, or sampling, 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....”

Additionally, California Rules of Court rule 3.1348(a) further provides, “The Court may award sanctions under the Discovery Act in favor of a party who files a motion to compel discovery, even though no opposition to the motion was filed, or opposition to the motion was withdrawn, or the requested discovery was provided to the moving party after the motion was filed.” (Underlines added.)

The Court finds that the mandatory sanctions apply in this case. The Court finds Henry Mayo Hospital’s counsel’s rate at $255 per hour to be reasonable. However, the Court adjusts the total hours to 1.5 hours, given that no Opposition or Reply papers were filed.

Utilizing the lodestar approach, the Court determines the total and reasonable amount of attorney’s fees and costs incurred for the work performed in connection with the Motion to be $382.50, calculated based on a reasonable hourly rate of $255.00 for one and a half hours reasonably spent.

Therefore, the Court GRANTS IN PART Henry Mayo Hospital’s request for monetary sanctions.

CONCLUSION

Defendant Henry Mayo Newhall Memorial Hospital’s Motion to Compel Responses to Requests for Production of Documents, Set One, is GRANTED.

Plaintiff Robert Devries is ordered to serve verified responses, without objection, to the Requests for Production of Documents, Set One, within 30 days.

Defendant Henry Mayo Newhall Memorial Hospital’s request for monetary sanctions is GRANTED IN PART.

Plaintiff Robert Devries is ordered to pay $382.50 to the counsel of Defendant Henry Mayo Newhall Memorial Hospital within 30 days.

Moving party to give notice.