Judge: Deirdre Hill, Case: 22TRCV00527, Date: 2023-05-11 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22TRCV00527    Hearing Date: May 11, 2023    Dept: M

Hearing Date: May 11, 2023             

Moving Parties: Plaintiff National Collegiate Student Loan Trust 2006-3, A Delaware Statutory Trust,                      

Responding Party: None        

Motion to Deem RFAs Admitted

            The court considered the moving papers.  No opposition or reply where filed.

RULING

            The Motion is GRANTED.  Defendant’s request for admission (set one) are deemed admitted. 

BACKGROUND

            On June 28, 2022, Plaintiff National Collegiate Student Loan Trust 2006-3, A Delaware Statutory Trust, filed a complaint asserting causes of action for breach of contract against defendants Tiffany A. Berry and Marcy E. Sollee.

            Plaintiff now moves to deem the requests for admission (set one) propounded on defendants admitted.

LEGAL AUTHORITY

            Where there has been no timely response to requests for admissions, a “requesting party may move for an order that the genuineness of any documents and the truth of any matters specified in the requests be deemed admitted, as well as for a monetary sanction under Chapter 7 (commencing with section 2023.010).”  The court “shall” grant the motion to deem requests for admission admitted “unless it finds that the party to whom the requests for admission have been directed has served, before the hearing on the motion, a proposed response to the requests for admission that is in substantial compliance with Section 2033.220.”  (CCP § 2033.280(c).)

DISCUSSION

            Plaintiff moves to deem the requests for admission (set one) propounded on defendants admitted.

            On November 4, 2022, plaintiff served the requests on defendants by mail.  (Boone Decl., ¶ 3.)  Defendants responses were due by December 3, 2022.  (CCP §§ 1013 2033.250.)  To date, defendants have failed to provide responses to the requests.  (Boone Decl., ¶ 7.)

            Defendants failed to file an opposition or inform the court that responses were provided to plaintiff.

            Accordingly, the court finds that defendants have failed to comply with their discovery obligation and deems the requests admitted.  Thus, plaintiff’s motion is GRANTED.

             While sanctions are mandatory “on the party or attorney, or both, whose failure to serve a timely response to request for admission necessitated this motion,” plaintiff failed to request sanctions in the notice of the motion, or include any evidence in support of the fees and cost incurred to bring the motion.  Accordingly, the court finds that plaintiff failed to properly request sanctions to the extent it sought them.

            Plaintiff is ordered to give notice of ruling.