Judge: Gary Y. Tanaka, Case: 20TRCV00918, Date: 2022-08-29 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 20TRCV00918 Hearing Date: August 29, 2022 Dept: B
LOS ANGELES SUPERIOR COURT – SOUTHWEST DISTRICT
Honorable Gary Y. Tanaka Monday, August 29, 2022
Department B Calendar No. 6
PROCEEDINGS
Juan Ramirez, et al. v. Get Lucky Capital, LLC, et al.
20TRCV00918
Weststar Property Management, Inc.’s Motion to Compel Juan Ramirez's Responses to Form Interrogatories, Set One
Weststar Property Management, Inc.’s Motion to Compel Juan Ramirez's Responses to Special Interrogatories, Set One
Weststar Property Management, Inc.’s Motion to Compel Juan Ramirez's Responses to Requests for Admission, Set One
Weststar Property Management, Inc.’s Motion to Compel Juan Ramirez's Requests for Production of Documents, Set One
Weststar Property Management, Inc.’s Motion to Compel Alondra Ramirez's Responses to Form Interrogatories, Set One
Weststar Property Management, Inc.’s Motion to Compel Alondra Ramirez's Responses to Special Interrogatories, Set One
Weststar Property Management, Inc.’s Motion to Compel Alondra Ramirez's Responses to Requests for Admission, Set One
Weststar Property Management, Inc.’s Motion to Compel Alondra Ramirez's Responses to Requests for Production of Documents, Set One
TENTATIVE RULING
Weststar Property Management, Inc.’s (1) Motion to Compel Juan Ramirez's Responses to Form Interrogatories, Set One; (2) Motion to Compel Juan Ramirez's Responses to Special Interrogatories, Set One; (3) Motion to Compel Juan Ramirez's Responses to Requests for Admission, Set One; (4) Motion to Compel Juan Ramirez's Requests for Production of Documents, Set One; (5) Motion to Compel Alondra Ramirez's Responses to Form Interrogatories, Set One; (6) Motion to Compel Alondra Ramirez's Responses to Special Interrogatories, Set One; (7) Motion to Compel Alondra Ramirez's Responses to Requests for Admission, Set One; and (8) Motion to Compel Alondra Ramirez's Responses to Requests for Production of Documents, Set One, are granted, in part, and denied, without prejudice, in part.
Background
Plaintiffs filed their Complaint on December 10, 2020. Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint was filed on February 3, 2022. Plaintiffs allege the following facts. Plaintiffs allege that Defendants forcibly entered, and Plaintiffs were forcibly evicted from, their lawful possession of the property located at 13106 S. Vermont Ave., Unit #7, Gardena, Ca. 90247. Plaintiffs allege the following causes of action: 1. Forcible Entry; 2. Forcible Eviction.
Motions to Compel/Motion to Deem Admitted
CCP § 2030.290 states: “If a party to whom interrogatories are directed fails to serve a timely response, the following rules apply…The party propounding the interrogatories may move for an order compelling response to the interrogatories.” (CCP § 2030.290(b).)
CCP § 2031.300 states: “If a party to whom a demand for inspection, copying, testing, or sampling is directed fails to serve a timely response to it, the following rules shall apply: The party making the demand may move for an order compelling response to the demand.” (CCP § 2031.300(b)).
CCP § 2033.280(b) states: “The requesting 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 under Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 2023.010).” (CCP § 2033.280(b))
On July 6, 2021, Defendant served Form Interrogatories, Set One, Special Interrogatories, Set One, Requests for Production of Documents, Set One, and Requests for Admissions, Set One, upon Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs failed to serve responses to the subject written discovery requests. (Declaration, Alice Charkhchyan).
Thus, the motions to compel responses to Form Interrogatories, Set One, Special Interrogatories, Set One, and Requests for Production of Documents, Set One, are granted. Plaintiffs are ordered to serve responses within 10 days of this date.
The motions to compel responses to Request for Admissions are denied without prejudice. The discovery code does not authorize a statutory basis to compel initial responses to Requests for Admissions. Thus, the motion is denied without prejudice, to the extent that Defendant may file and serve statutorily authorized motions to deem requests for admission admitted.
Sanctions
Defendant’s requests for monetary sanctions are granted. The Court notes that sanctions were only noticed and requested with respect to the two motions to compel responses to Form Interrogatories.
Sanctions are awarded in favor of Defendant and against Plaintiffs and Plaintiffs’ counsel in the total amount of $1,070.00. The hourly rate sought of $190 is a reasonable rate. The time allotted for preparation and appearance was 5 hours. Defendant was also awarded $120 in filing fees. Sanctions are payable within 30 days of this date
Defendant is ordered to give notice of this ruling.