Judge: H. Jay Ford, III, Case: 23SMCV03508, Date: 2025-03-11 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23SMCV03508    Hearing Date: March 11, 2025    Dept: O

3-11-25 23SMCV03508 Fieldman MTC FROGS, SROGS, RFPs and RFAs deemed Admitted - Milefchik

Plaintiff Kim Fieldman's Motion to Compel FROGS, SROGS, RFPs and RFAs deemed admitted and sanctions in the amount of $2,245.50 against Defendant Eric Milefchik is  GRANTED. The Motion was filed on 11-21-24, an opposition was filed on 2-27-25, and a reply was filed on 3-4-25. The Court ordered all Defendants in the action to supply discovery responses in the 10-29-24 Minute Order, however, Plaintiff declares that as of the time of the motion filing no discovery responses were received. (Cunny Decl., ¶ 5.) Defendant's counsel declares they will serve the responses prior to the hearing date, and states that the sheer volume of the requests, in addition to having difficulty with their client, created a delay in serving responses. (Hunt Decl., ¶¶ 3–5.) The Court finds that Defendant fails to articulate a substantial justification for its failure to serve discovery in a timely manner, as Defendant has repeatedly failed to respond to Plaintiff's attempts to resolve the matter. (See Cunny Decl., ¶ 4.) Defendants are ordered to provide responses to FROGS, SROGS, and RFPS, without objection, within 10 days of the hearing, and pay sanctions in the amount of $2,245.50 (6.5 hrs @ $345/hr.)

If Defendant provides RFA responses in substantial compliance with CCP § 2033.220 prior to the 3-11-25 hearing, the RFA's will not be deemed admitted pursuant to CCP § 2033.280. (See Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.280c [The court shall order RFA's admitted "unless it finds that the party to whom the requests for admission have been directed has served, before the hearing on the motion, a proposed response to the requests for admission that is in substantial compliance with Section 2033.220. It is mandatory that the court impose a monetary sanction under Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 2023.010) on the party or attorney, or both, whose failure to serve a timely response to requests for admission necessitated this motion."].)