Judge: Elaine W. Mandel, Case: 23SMUD01577, Date: 2023-10-31 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23SMUD01577    Hearing Date: February 13, 2024    Dept: P

Tentative Ruling

Essex Management Corporation v. Shontel Johnson, Case No. 23SMUD01577

Hearing Date February 13, 2024

Defendant Shontel Johnson’s Motion to Compel Further Responses to Written Discovery (UNOPPOSED)

Plaintiff Essex sues defendant Johnson for unlawful detainer. Johnson’s defenses include a claim that Essex breached the warranty of habitability. The unlawful detainer case has been consolidated with Johnson’s lawsuit against Essex for breach of the warranty of habitability and related claims.

On November 7, 2023 Johnson propounded special interrogatories, form interrogatories, requests for production of documents, and requests for admission. Johnson argues Essex to date has not provided compliant responses.

On January 24, 2024 the parties appeared at an informal discovery conference, after which the court gave Johnson leave to file a discovery motion “if necessary.” Johnson now moves to compel further responses to written discovery.

There is no opposition to the motion, which the court will treat as an admission that Johnson’s arguments have merit and that Essex’s discovery responses were insufficient.

Essex is ordered to supplement its discovery responses as requested in Johnson’s motion. The court declines to issue sanctions, however, as Essex has consistently responded to Johnson’s discovery requests, supplemented them, and participated in the discovery process. The responses at issue here, though deficient, were not made in bad faith.

Further, the requests for admission will not be deemed admitted, as such an order would be tantamount to issuing terminating sanctions against Essex, an unduly harsh outcome. Essex is ordered, however, to supplement its responses to RFAs, without the objections identified as baseless in the motion.

GRANTED.