Judge: Frank M. Tavelman, Case: 23BBCV02662, Date: 2024-12-13 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23BBCV02662    Hearing Date: December 13, 2024    Dept: A

MOTION TO DEEM REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS MATTERS ADMITTED

NOTICE:

The Court is not requesting oral argument on this matter.  The Court is guided by California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1308(a)(1) whereby notice of intent to appear is requested.  Unless the Court directs argument in the Tentative Ruling, no argument is requested and any party seeking argument should notify all other parties and the court by 4:00 p.m. on the court day before the hearing of the party’s intention to appear and argue.  The tentative ruling will become the ruling of the court if no argument is received.  

Notice may be given either by email at BurDeptA@LACourt.org or by telephone at (818) 260-8412.

ALLEGATIONS: 

American Tilemakers, a California Corporation (Plaintiff) brings this action against Industrial Furnace & Insulation Solutions, a California Corporation and Industrial Furnace & Insulation Solutions, LLC (Defendants). Plaintiffs allege Defendants are in breach of a contract for the purchase and installation of three gas fired ceramic kilns to be used in Plaintiff’s tile production. Plaintiff alleges that despite their timely payment of the purchase price ($123,165.94) Defendants failed to deliver the kilns in working condition.

Before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion to Deem Matters in their Request for Admissions (RFA) as admitted. Plaintiff states this motion has resulted from Defendants’ failure to respond to their RFA demands. Defendants have not opposed this motion. The Court notes that, pursuant to C.R.C. Rule 8.54(c), a failure to oppose a motion may be deemed consent to its being granted. 

ANALYSIS: 

I.                    LEGAL STANDARD 

If a party fails to respond to requests for admission in a timely manner, the requesting party may move for an order that the matters be deemed admitted. (C.C.P. § 2033.280(b).) The requesting party’s motion must be granted by the court unless the party to whom the requests for admission have been directed has served a proposed response to the requests for admission that is in substantial compliance with C.C.P. § 2033.220 prior to the hearing.  (C.C.P. § 2033.280(c).)  By failing to timely respond, the party to whom the requests are directed waives any objection to the requests, including one based on privilege or work product.  (C.C.P. § 2033.280(a).) 

II.                 MERITS

Request to Deem RFA Matters Admitted 

On May 8, 2024, Plaintiff served their RFA on Defendants’ counsel via email. (Segal Decl. ¶ 2, Exh. 1.) On September 24, 2024, Defendants’ counsel emailed to request an extension to October 4, 2024. (Segal Decl. Exh. 2.) Plaintiff’s counsel denied the extension but stated that they would not move to deem the RFA matters admitted provided they received responses by October 4, 2024. (Segal Decl. Exh. 2.) Plaintiff’s counsel further stated that this was the first contact from Defendants’ counsel on the discovery matters, despite the multiple attempts of Plaintiff’s counsel to meet and confer. (Id.) As of the filing of this motion, Plaintiff remains without responses. (Segal Decl. ¶ 4.)

Given the foregoing, Plaintiff’s unopposed Motion to Deem RFA Matters Admitted is GRANTED.

Sanctions

The Court shall impose monetary sanctions for failure to timely respond to requests for admission unless the party acted with substantial justification, or the circumstances render imposition of sanctions unjust. (C.C.P. § 2033.280(c).) The Court must impose a monetary sanction on the party or attorney whose failure to serve timely RFA responses necessitated the motion. (Id.)

The Court awards sanctions in favor of Plaintiff as against Defendants’ counsel in the amount of $800. This amount reflects two hours of attorney work at the stated rate of $400 per hour. (Segal Decl. ¶ 5.) In the Court experience, this amount is reasonable to compensate Plaintiff in bringing a motion of this complexity.  

--- 

RULING:

In the event the parties submit on this tentative ruling, or a party requests a signed order or the court in its discretion elects to sign a formal order, the following form will be either electronically signed or signed in hard copy and entered into the court’s records. 

ORDER 

American Tilemakers, a California Corporation’s Motion to Deem RFA Matters Admitted came on regularly for hearing on December 13, 2024, with appearances/submissions as noted in the minute order for said hearing, and the court, being fully advised in the premises, did then and there rule as follows: 

THE MOTION TO DEEM RFA MATTERS ADMITTED IS GRANTED.

SANCTIONS ARE AWARDED IN PLAINTIFF’S FAVOR AS AGAINST DEFENDANTS’ COUNSEL IN THE AMOUNT OF $800.

SANCTIONS TO BE PAID WITHIN 30 DAYS.

PLAINTIFF TO PROVIDE NOTICE.  

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATE:  December 13, 2024                            _______________________________ 

                                                                        F.M. TAVELMAN, Judge 

Superior Court of California 

County of Los Angeles