Judge: Gregory Keosian, Case: 19STCV07862, Date: 2022-09-28 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 19STCV07862    Hearing Date: September 28, 2022    Dept: 61

Plaintiff Julie Hutchings’s Motions to Deem Matters Admitted and Compel Responses to Requests for Production and Form and Special Interrogatories from Defendants Architectural, Inc. and Sebastion Ernesto Amighini are GRANTED. Sanctions are awarded against Defendants and their counsel in the amount of $4,810.

Plaintiff to give notice.

I.                MOTION TO COMPEL & DEEM ADMITTED

A propounding party may demand a responding party to produce documents that are in their possession, custody or control. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.010.) A party may likewise conduct discovery by propounding interrogatories to another party to be answered under oath. (Code Civ. Proc. § 2030.010, subd. (a).) The responding party must respond to the production demand either by complying, by representing that the party lacks the ability to comply, or by objecting to the demand. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.210.) The responding party must respond to the interrogatories by answering or objecting. (Code Civ. Proc. § 2030.210, subd. (a).) If the responding party fails to serve timely responses, the propounding party may move for an order compelling responses to the production demand and interrogatories. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.290, 2031.300.)

A party who fails to serve a timely response to interrogatories or a demand for inspection waives any objection to the demand. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.290, 2031.300.)

Likewise, “[a]ny party may obtain discovery . . . by a written request that any other party to the action admit the genuineness of specified documents, or the truth of specified matters of fact, opinion relating to fact, or application of law to fact. A request for admission may relate to a matter that is in controversy between the parties.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.010.) If a party fails to serve a timely response to requests for admissions, “[t]he 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” (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.280 subd. (b).)

A party who fails to timely respond to requests for admission waives all objections to the requests. (Code Civ. Proc. § 2033.280, subd. (a).)

Plaintiff Julie Hutchings served requests for admission, requests for production, and form and special interrogatories upon both Defendants Architectural, Inc. and Sebastion Ernesto Amighini on January 5, 2022, with responses due on February 9, 2022. (Bleifer Decl. ¶¶ 5–6.) Despite efforts to meet and confer, no responses were given before the motions were filed. (Bleifer Decl. ¶¶ 6–8.)

No oppositions have been filed, but in replies filed on September 21, 2022, Plaintiff states that belated responses to requests for production were served on September 9, 2022, yet still contained numerous objections. Bleifer Decl. Exh. D.) Such objections have been waived by the failure to serve timely responses. (Code Civ. Proc. § 2031.300.)

Accordingly, the motions to compel and deem admitted are GRANTED.

II.   SANCTIONS

Sanctions are also mandatory against a party whose failure to serve responses to requests for admission makes the motion necessary. (Code Civ. Proc. § 2033.280, subd. (c).) Moreover, a court “may award sanctions under the Discovery Act in favor of a party who files a motion to compel discovery, even though no opposition to the motion was filed, or opposition to the motion was withdrawn, or the requested discovery was provided to the moving party after the motion was filed.” (CRC Rule 3.1348, subd. (a).)

Plaintiff seeks $1,285.00 in sanctions, representing 3.5 hours of attorney work at an hourly rate of $350, plus a $60 filing fee for each motion, representing a total sanctions award of $7,710.00. (Bleifer Decl. ¶¶ 6–7.) These fees include three hours ($1,050) responding to an opposition that was never filed, and five duplicative one-hour charges ($1,750) for appearing at the hearing on all six motions. The maximum sanctions request is appropriately reduced to $4,810.00.

Sanctions are awarded against Defendants and their counsel in the amount of $4,810.