Judge: Donald F. Gaffney, Case: Pondoff v. Haughey, Date: 2022-10-12 Tentative Ruling

TENTATIVE RULING:

Motions to Compel Further Responses to Requests for Admission.

Plaintiffs Cherie Pondoff, Mark Pondoff, Cynthia Kavanaugh, and Debra Adent move to compel Defendant Suzanna Pondoff-Haughey to serve further responses to requests for admission (set two) numbers 36-40, 42-47, and 50-57.  For the following reasons, the unopposed motion is GRANTED.

Defendant objected to the majority of these requests on the basis that the requests are vague or not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence.  Having not filed an opposition to the motion, Defendant failed to justify any of her objections. (See Coy v. Superior Court (1962) 58 Cal.2d 210, 220-221 (if a timely motion to compel has been filed, the burden is on the responding party to justify any objection or failure to fully answer the interrogatories).)  Further, Defendant’s responses are not verified.  “Unsworn responses are tantamount to no responses at all.”  (Appleton v. Superior Court (1988) 206 Cal.App.3d 632, 636.)

Defendant is ordered to provide verified responses without objections to the Requests for Admission at issue within 30 days of notice of this ruling.

Pursuant to Code Civ. Proc. § 2033.290, the Court shall impose a monetary sanction against any party, person, or attorney who unsuccessfully makes or opposes a motion to compel a further response, “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.”

Defendant is ordered to pay sanctions of $1,560 (3 hours at $500 /hour + $60 filing fee) to Plaintiffs.

Plaintiffs to give notice.