Judge: Gary I. Micon, Case: 23CHCV01130, Date: 2024-04-30 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23CHCV01130    Hearing Date: April 30, 2024    Dept: F43

Dept. F43

Date: 4-30-24

Case #23CHCV01130 , Justine Amanda Cruz Echavez vs. California Institute of the Arts

Trial Date: 5-5-2025

MOTIONS TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSES TO REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION

MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff Justine Amanda Cruz Echavez

RESPONDING PARTY: Defendant California Institute of the Arts

RELIEF REQUESTED

Compelling verified further responses to Plaintiffs’ responses to requests for production of documents; as well as sanctions.

RULING: Motion to compel further responses to request for production is granted for the verification of the responses.

SUMMARY OF ACTION

Plaintiff Justine Amanda Cruz Echavez (Plaintiff) filed this action against Defendant California Institute of the Arts (Defendant) on April 18, 2023. On July 7, 2023, Plaintiff served Defendant with Plaintiff’s Requests for Production of Documents, Set One. On September 19, 2023, Defendant served Plaintiff with objections and responses to Plaintiff’s RFPs without verifications.

Plaintiff claims that Defendant objected to RFP Nos. 7 and 20 and failed to provide any substantive response to RFP No. 20. Plaintiff sent Defendant a meet and confer letter on October 30, 2023, regarding the alleged deficiencies. On November 20, 2023, defense counsel requested additional time to respond. Plaintiff agreed to a 30-day extension. On December 22, 2023, Defendant served supplemental responses to the RFPs but failed to provide verification, and Plaintiff still found the responses to RFP Nos. 7 and 20 to be deficient.

On January 3, 2024, Plaintiff sent another meet and confer letter. After following up with defense counsel several times, a final deadline of February 7, 2024, was set. Prior to Plaintiff filing this motion on February 6, 2024, Defendant never addressed the deficiencies.

In Defendant’s opposition filed on April 17, 2024, Defendant indicates that it has provided Amended Supplemental Responses that should address the issues that Plaintiff had.

Plaintiff argues in her reply filed on April 23, 2024, that Defendant’s new supplemental responses for RFP Nos. 7 and 20 have not been verified. It appears from Plaintiff’s reply that verification and sanctions are the only remaining issues.

ANALYSIS

A party to whom a demand for inspection is direct must sign the response under oath, and failure to provide a verification for responses is “tantamount to no response” at all. (CCP §§ 2030.250; 2031.250; Appleton v. Superior Court (1998) 206 Cal.App.3d 632, 636.)

Defendant has not verified its Amended Second Supplemental Responses to RFP Nos. 7 and 20. This verification is required.

Defendant is ordered to provide verification for its Amended Second Supplemental Responses to RFP Nos. 7 and 20.

             Sanctions

Pursuant to CCP § 2031.310(h), courts “shall impose a monetary sanction” against a party or attorney who unsuccessfully opposes a motion to compel a further response to requests for production without substantial justification. It is a misuse of the discovery process to make unmeritorious objections and evasive responses and such misuse is sanctionable. (CCP § 2023.010.)

Plaintiff has requested against Defendant and Defendant’s counsel of record. Defendant unsuccessfully opposed Plaintiff’s motion to compel further responses because the further responses provided by Defendant were without verification and Defendant did not serve the responses until after Plaintiff filed this motion. Some sanctions against Defendant are warranted. Plaintiff has requested $4,200 in sanctions based on 8 hours at $525 an hour. (Khatib Decl., ¶¶ 13-14.) Eight hours for this motion appears to be excessive. The Court will only assess sanctions for 4 hours at $525 an hour for a total of $2,100.

Plaintiff’s request for sanctions is granted in the amount of $2,100 against Defendant and Defendant’s counsel of record.

ORDER

1.      Plaintiff’s motion to compel further responses to requests for production of documents is granted for the verification of responses.

2.      Defendant must provide verified responses within 30 days.

3.      Defendant and Defendant’s counsel of record are ordered to pay sanctions in the amount of $2,100 to Plaintiff’s counsel within 30 days.