Judge: David Sotelo, Case: 19STCV39121, Date: 2022-10-10 Tentative Ruling



Case Number: 19STCV39121    Hearing Date: October 10, 2022    Dept: 40

MOVING PARTY:               Plaintiff 2222 South Figueroa, LLC.

 

Plaintiff 2222 South Figueroa, LLC brings this action against its former tenants, Defendants Tsegab Fenta and Tezeta T. Alemayehu—individuals doing business as Paramount Care Staffing—alleging a single claim for Breach of Written Lease Agreement based on allegations that the Defendants failed to pay rent and quit the tenancy prior to its contractual end—August (August 18, 2021) with a premature departure on February 6, 2019. Plaintiff alleges $59,077.32 in lost profits, lost rents, cleaning costs, and other incidental damages.

 

Before the Court is Plaintiff’s August 11, 2022 Motion to Deem Requests for Admission Admitted and/or for Terminating Sanctions against Defendants failed to provide responses to Plaintiff’s December 14, 2021 Requests for Admission, Set One, despite a Stipulation between the parties, entered by this Court on July 11, 2022 and mandating that the Defendants provide responses for this and two other discovery requests by July 25, 2022.

 

Evidence before the Court shows that, as of the date of this hearing, the Defendants have altogether failed to respond to the pertinent discovery requests and the Court GRANTS the Motion to Deem Requests for Admission [Set One] as Admitted because:

 

(1) Plaintiff 2222 South Figueroa provides evidence showing that on December 14, 2021, Plaintiff served the Requests for Admission, Set One, on Defendants Fenta and Alemayehu (Mot., Sacuzzo Decl., Exs. 1 [Proof of Service], 8 [RFAs served on Fenta], 9 [RFAs served on Alemayehu]; see Mot., 2:7-15);

 

(2) Plaintiff 2222 South Figueroa provides evidence that, as of the date this motion was made—i.e., August 11, 2022—Defendants Fenta and Alemayehu had failed to provide responses to Plaintiff’s RFAs despite a Stipulation between the parties and this Court’s July 11, 2022 Order entering the Stipulation and mandating responses by July 25, 2022 (Mot., Sacuzzo Decl., ¶¶ 5-7, Ex. 10 [containing July 11, 2022 Stipulation and Order re Plaintiff’s Discovery Motions]; see Mot., 2:16-3:12; see also Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.280 [RFA motion permitted where propounding party does not receive timely response to RFAs]);

 

(3) No evidence exists before the Court to determine that, as of this hearing, Defendant Fenta or Defendant Alemayehu has responded to Plaintiff’s RFAs, Set One; and

 

(4) The RFAs are within the proper scope of discovery because they request admissions from the Defendants related to the Lease Agreement that underlies this action, Fenta and Alemayehu’s signature thereof, the term of the Lease (an alleged five years beginning on or about August 19, 2016), the Defendants’ breach of the Lease, other matters related to the Lease, damages to Plaintiff, and non-waiver of damages by Plaintiff (see Code Civ. Proc., § 2017.010 [scope of discovery extends to “any matter, not privileged, that is relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action or to the determination of any motion made in that action, if the matter either is itself admissible in evidence or appears reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence”]).

 

The Court also GRANTS monetary sanctions of $1,185 against Defendants Fenta and Alemayehu, to be paid jointly and severally to Plaintiff 2222 South Figueroa, LLC. (See Mot., 7:8-16; Mot., Sacuzzo Decl., ¶ 8; see also Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.280, subd. (c); see also Stover v. Bruntz (2017) 12 Cal.App.5th 19, 31-32 [sanctions mandatory where failure to timely respond to RFA request necessitates a motion to compel responses]; Appleton v. Superior Ct. (1988) 206 Cal.App.3d 632, 635 [same].)

 

The Court DENIES Plaintiff’s alternative Motion for Terminating Sanctions because the Court does not, at this time, find that terminating sanctions are the appropriate remedy for the harm suffered by Plaintiff 2222 South Figueroa because of the nonresponse. (See Mot., 4:17-7:7; see also Code Civ. Proc., § 2023.010, subds. (d), (g).)

 

Conclusion

 

Plaintiff 2222 South Figueroa, LLC’s Motion to Deem Requests for Admission as Admitted and/or for Terminating Sanctions against Defendants Tsegab Fenta and Tezeta T. Alemayehu is GRANTED in Part and DENIED in Part:

 

(1) GRANTED as to Motion to Deem RFAs Admitted against Defendants;

 

(2) GRANTED as to Monetary Sanctions against Defendants Fenta and Alemayehu in the amount of $1,185, to be paid jointly and severally, with payment ORDERED to be remitted to Plaintiff within 10 calendar days of receipt of this notice.

 

(3) DENIED as to Terminating Sanctions because the Court does not find the circumstances here merit the imposition of this remedy.