Judge: Holly J. Fujie, Case: 22STC138516, Date: 2024-06-28 Tentative Ruling

DEPARTMENT 56 JUDGE HOLLY J. FUJIE, LAW AND MOTION RULINGS. The court makes every effort to post tentative rulings by 5.00 pm of the court day before the hearing. The tentative ruling will not become the final ruling until the hearing [see CRC 3.1308(a)(2)], and are also available in the courtroom on the day of the hearing [see CRC 3.1308(b)]. If the parties wish to submit on the tentative ruling and avoid a court appearance, all counsel must agree and choose which counsel will give notice. That counsel must 1) call Dept 56 by 8:30 a.m. on the day of the hearing (213/633-0656) and state that all parties will submit on the tentative ruling, and 2) serve notice of the ruling on all parties. If any party declines to submit on the tentative ruling, then no telephone call is necessary and all parties should appear at the hearing in person or by Court Call. Court reporters are not provided, and parties who want a record of motions and other proceedings must hire a privately retained certified court reporter.

Case Number: 22STC138516    Hearing Date: June 28, 2024    Dept: 56

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff Roie Maor (“Plaintiff”)

RESPONDING PARTY: None

The Court considered the moving papers filed.  The motions are unopposed.

BACKGROUND

            This case arises from a complaint filed by Plaintiff against Defendant Eve M. Aron (“Defendant”) on December 9, 2022.  The complaint asserts breach of contract and various other causes of action stemming from an agreement in which Plaintiff purportedly agreed to lend money to Defendant, who in turn, allegedly agreed to use the funds to buy and resell horses for profit.

DISCUSSION

Legal Standard

If a party to whom requests for admission are served fails to provide a timely response, the party to whom the request was directed waives any objections, including based on privilege or the work product doctrine.  (CCP § 2033.280(a).)  The requesting party can move for an order that the genuineness of any documents and the truth of any matters specified in the request be deemed admitted.  (CCP § 2033.280(b).)  The court shall issue this order unless the party to whom the request was made serves a response in substantial compliance prior to the hearing on the motion.  It is mandatory that the court impose a monetary sanction… on the party or attorney, or both, whose failure to serve a timely response to requests for admission necessitated this motion.  (Id., § 2033.280, subd. (c).); Cal. Rules of Court R. 3.1348(a) (the court can award sanctions under the Discovery Act in favor of a party seeking to compel discovery even though no opposition was filed, the opposition was withdrawn, or the requested discovery was provided to the moving party after the motion was filed).)

Motions Filed – Motion to Deem Facts Admitted; and Motion to Deem Genuineness of Documents Admitted

Plaintiff served Requests for Admission, Set One (“Facts RFAs”) upon Plaintiff on November 14, 2023.  (Declaration of Richard B. Rudolph in Support of Plaintiff Roie Maor’s Motion to Deem Facts Admitted (“Rudolph Facts RFAs Decl.”), ¶ 3.)  Defendant did not serve responses to the Facts RFAs as of the date of Rudolph’s declaration.  (Rudolph Facts RFAs Decl., ¶ 6.)  No opposition was filed to the Motion to Deem Facts Admitted as of the date of this Order.

Plaintiff also served Requests for Genuineness of Documents, Set One (“Documents RFAs”) upon Plaintiff on January 10, 2024.  (Declaration of Richard B. Rudolph in Support of Plaintiff Roie Maor’s Motion to Deem Genuineness of Documents Admitted (“Rudolph Documents RFAs Decl.”), ¶ 4.)  Defendant did not serve responses to the Documents RFAs as of the date of Rudolph’s declaration.  (Rudolph Documents RFAs Decl., ¶ 6.)  No opposition was filed to the Motion to Deem Genuineness of Documents Admitted as of the date of this Order.

Plaintiff now moves for an order to deem the truth of the matters specified in the Facts RFAs as admitted, and the genuineness of documents in the Documents RFAs as established. 

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Motion to Deem Facts Admitted and Motion to Deem Genuineness of Documents are GRANTED.  The truth of the matters specified in the Facts RFAs is deemed admitted.  The genuineness of documents in the Documents RFAs is deemed established. 

Since no request for sanctions was made in the motions, no sanctions are imposed.

Plaintiff is ordered to give notice of this ruling.

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at SMC_DEPT56@lacourt.org as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org.  If the department does not receive an email and there are no appearances at the hearing, the motion will be placed off calendar.

Dated this 28th day of June 2024