Judge Elaine Lu, Case 21STCV44350 2023-01-23 Tentative Ruling

On April 26, 2021, Plaintiff MUFG Union Bank, N.A. (“Plaintiff”) filed the instant breach of loan agreement against Defendant Volodya Sarkisyan dba VS Handyman Services (“Defendant”). The complaint asserts four causes of action for (1) Breach of Written Agreement, (2) Foreclosure of Security Agreement, (3) Money Lent, and (4) Account Stated.

On July 13, 2022, Plaintiff filed the instant motion to compel Defendant’s response to Form Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents and to deem the Request for Admissions admitted (collectively “Discovery Requests”). No opposition or reply has been filed.

Under Code of Civil Procedure section 2030.260 subdivision (a), a party must respond to interrogatories within 30 days of service. Under Code of Civil Procedure section 2031.260 subdivision (a), a party must respond to requests for production of documents within 30 days of service. Under Code of Civil Procedure section 2033.250 subdivision (a), a party must respond to requests for admission within 30 days of service. However, these time limits are extended if served by mail, overnight delivery, fax, or electronically. (See CCP §§ 1010.6(a)(4), 1013.) Failure to timely respond waives all objections including privilege or on the protection of work product. (See CCP § 2031.300(a); see CCP § 2030.290(a) see also CCP § 2033.280(a).)

On April 20, 2022, Plaintiff served Defendant the at issue Discovery Requests by overnight delivery. (Tiberi Decl. ¶ 5, Exh. 1.) Accordingly, Defendant had until May 23, 2022 to timely respond.[1] On June 8, 2022, Plaintiff’s Counsel sent a meet and confer letter to Defense Counsel regarding the at issue Discovery Requests noting that there had been no response. (Tiberi Decl. ¶ 6, Exh. 2.) As of filing, Plaintiff has not received any response to the Discovery Requests from Defendant. (Tiberi Decl. ¶ 7.)

Defendant Volodya Sarkisyan is ordered to serve verified code compliant responses to the Request for Production of Documents without objections, within thirty (30) days of notice of this order.

Defendant Volodya Sarkisyan is ordered to serve verified code compliant responses to the Form Interrogatories without objections, within thirty (30) days of notice of this order.

Where there has been no timely response to a request for admissions under Code of Civil Procedure section 2033.010, the propounding 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. (CCP § 2033.280(b).) The party who has failed to respond waives any objections to the demand, unless the court grants that party relief from the waiver, upon a showing (1) that the party has subsequently served a substantially compliant response, and (2) that the party’s failure to respond was the result of mistake, inadvertence, or excusable neglect. (CCP § 2033.280(a)(1)-(2).) The court “shall” grant a motion to deem admitted requests for admissions, “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).)

As Defendant has not responded to the Request for Admissions, Plaintiff’s motion for an order deeming the Request for Admissions admitted is GRANTED pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 2033.280. Defendant Volodya Sarkisyan is deemed to have admitted the truth of all matters specified in Plaintiff MUFG Union Bank, N.A.’s Requests of Admission as of this date.

Plaintiff seeks sanctions of $1,500.00 against Defendant to compensate Plaintiff’s Counsel in bringing the instant motion. Plaintiff’s Counsel claims to have an hourly rate of $300.00 per hour and that “Plaintiff has incurred attorney’s fees in the total amount of $1,500.00, which includes the time for drafting the Motion and appearing at the hearing on the Motion.” (Tiberi Decl. ¶¶ 9-10.)

“The court shall impose a monetary sanction … against any party, person, or attorney who unsuccessfully makes or opposes a motion to compel a response to [request for production], 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.” (CCP § 2031.300(c); CCP § 2030.290(c).) As to the failure to timely respond to the requests for admission, “[i]t is mandatory that the court impose a monetary sanction …on the party or attorney, or both, whose failure to serve a timely response to requests for admission necessitated this motion. (CCP § 2033.280(c).)

Here sanctions are mandatory and there are no circumstances making the imposition of sanctions unjust. Moreover, the Court finds that Defendant’s failure to timely respond to the discovery request is an abuse of discovery. (CCP § 2023.030(a); Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 3.1348(a).)

Moreover, the court finds that the total amount requested –$1,500.00– is reasonable in view of the totality of the circumstances.

Based on the foregoing, Plaintiff MUFG Union Bank, N.A.’s motions to compel discovery responses from Defendant Volodya Sarkisyan is GRANTED.

Defendant Volodya Sarkisyan is ordered to serve verified code compliant responses to the Request for Production of Documents without objections, within thirty (30) days of notice of this order.

Defendant Volodya Sarkisyan is ordered to serve verified code compliant responses to the Form Interrogatories without objections, within thirty (30) days of notice of this order.

Defendant Volodya Sarkisyan is deemed to have admitted the truth of all matters specified in Plaintiff MUFG Union Bank, N.A.’s Requests of Admission as of this date.

Defendant Volodya Sarkisyan ordered to pay monetary sanctions in the amount of $1,500.00 to Plaintiff MUFG Union Bank, N.A. by and through counsel, within thirty (30) days of notice of this order.

[1] May 22, 2022 which is exactly 32 days from service of the Discovery Request – as it was served by overnight mail– was a Sunday– and thus a court holiday extending the deadline to file the instant motion to May 23, 2022. (CCP §§ 12-12(c).)

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

Department 26