Judge Holly J. Fujie, Case 22STCV10702 2023-02-09 Tentative Ruling

The Court has considered the moving and opposition papers. No reply papers were filed. Any reply papers were required to have been filed and served at least five court days before the hearing pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure (“CCP”) section 1005, subdivision (b).

Plaintiff’s complaint (the “Complaint”) alleges: (1) breach of contract; (2) fraud; (3) violation of the Uniform Fraudulent Conveyance Act; (4) open book account; (5) account stated; and (6) quantum meruit.

On December 12, 2022, Plaintiff filed a motion for an order deeming its Requests for Admissions, Set One (the “RFAs”) admitted (the “Motion”). The Motion also seeks monetary sanctions against Defendant and his counsel.

Under CCP section 2033.280, subdivision (a), where requests for admission are propounded on a party and that party fails to serve a timely response, that party waives any objection to the requests. (CCP § 2033.280, subd. (a).) 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. (CCP § 2033.280, subd. (b).) The court must grant a motion to have admission requests deemed admitted where responses have not been served prior to the hearing, or, if such responses were served, they were not in substantial compliance with CCP section 2033.220. (CCP § 2033.280, subd. (c).) It is mandatory that the court impose a monetary sanction the party or attorney, or both, whose failure to serve a timely response to requests for admission necessitated the motion. (Id.; see Stover v. Bruntz (2017) 12 Cal.App.5th 19, 31-32.)

Plaintiff served the RFAs on Defendant on October 21, 2022. (Declaration of Christopher J. Hamner (“Hamner Decl.”) ¶ 2, Exhibit A.) As of the filing of the motion, Defendant had not responded to the RFAs. (Hamner Decl. ¶ 3.)

In his opposition (the “Opposition”), Defendant provides evidence that his failure to timely serve responses to the RFAs was due to a family health emergency. (See Declaration of Stacy Dasaro (“Dasaro Decl.”) ¶ 6.) When Defendants’ counsel served the responses of the three other Defendants on November 21, 2022, she informed Plaintiff of the reason for Defendant’s outstanding responses and stated that his responses would be submitted separately as soon as possible. (Dasaro Decl. ¶ 7.) [1] Defendant served responses to the RFAs on December 16, 2022. (Dasaro Decl. ¶ 10.)[2]

Because Defendant submitted responses to the RFAs before the hearing on the Motion, the Court DENIES the Motion as to its request for an order deeming the RFAs admitted. CCP section 2033.280, subdivision (c) requires that the Court impose a monetary sanction against the party who necessitated the Motion, and the Court will therefore consider Plaintiff’s request for monetary sanctions.

Plaintiff requests $1,750 in monetary sanctions against Defendant in connection to the Motion. This amount represents: (1) a total of at least 2.5 hours drafting the moving and reply papers and attending the hearing at a rate of $650 per hour; and (2) $125 in filing and hearing reservation costs. (Hamner Decl. ¶ 4.) Because the Motion does not distinguish between costs actually incurred and anticipated future costs, the Court DENIES Plaintiff’s request for monetary sanctions.

In consideration of the current COVID-19 pandemic situation, the Court¿strongly¿encourages that appearances on all proceedings, including this one, be made by LACourtConnect if the parties do not submit on the tentative.¿¿If you instead intend to make an appearance in person at Court on this matter, you must send an email by 2 p.m. on the last Court day before the scheduled date of the hearing to¿SMC_DEPT56@lacourt.org¿stating your intention to appear in person.¿ The Court will then inform you by close of business that day of the time your hearing will be held. The time set for the hearing may be at any time during that scheduled hearing day, or it may be necessary to schedule the hearing for another date if the Court is unable to accommodate all personal appearances set on that date.¿ This rule is necessary to ensure that adequate precautions can be taken for proper social distancing.

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.

[1] The Opposition does not provide evidence that Plaintiff agreed (in writing or otherwise) to extend the time for Defendant to respond to the RFAs. (See CCP § 2033.260.)

[2] On January 27, 2022, Defendant filed a motion to be relieved from waiver of objections.