Judge: Holly J. Fujie, Case: 22STCV18330, Date: 2023-02-22 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV18330    Hearing Date: February 22, 2023    Dept: 56

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff

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

BACKGROUND

This action arises out of an employment relationship.  On June 3, 2022, Plaintiff filed a complaint (the “Complaint”) alleging: (1) retaliation pursuant to Labor Code section 1102.5; (2) retaliation pursuant in violation of Labor Code section 6310; (3) common law assault; (4) common law battery; (5) negligent hiring, supervision, or retention of employee; (6) constructive discharge; and (7) failure to pay minimum wages in violation of several Labor Code provisions.  

On October 14, 2022, Plaintiff filed: (1) a motion to compel responses to the Form Interrogatories (General and Employment), Special Interrogatories, and Requests for Production propounded on Defendant BTG LA LLC (“Defendant”) (the “Motion to Compel”); and (2) a motion to deem the Requests for Admissions propounded on Defendant admitted (the “RFA Motion”) (collectively, the “Motions”) on the grounds that Defendant has failed to provide timely responses to all of Plaintiff’s discovery requests.

DISCUSSION

            Under CCP section 2030.290, subdivision (b), when a party directs interrogatories towards a party and that party fails to serve a timely response, the party propounding the interrogatories may move for an order compelling response to the interrogatories.  (CCP § 2030.290, subd. (b).)  The moving party need only show that the interrogatories were served on the opposing party, the time has expired to respond to the interrogatories and no responses have been served in order for the court to compel the opposing party to respond.  (Leach v. Superior Court (1980) 111 Cal.App.3d 902, 906.) 

Where there has been no timely response to a demand for inspection, copying, testing or sampling, the demanding party may seek an order compelling a response.  (CCP § 2031.300, subd. (b).)  Failure to timely respond waives all objections, including privilege and work product.  (CCP § 2031.300, subd. (a).)  

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.)  

            On September 1, 2022, Plaintiff propounded the discovery at issue in the Motions on Defendant.  (See Declaration of Shiraz Simonian (“Simonian Decl.”) ¶ 3, Exhibit 1.)  Defendant did not serve its responses by the October 4, 2022 deadline.  (Simonian Decl. ¶ 4.)  Although Plaintiff’s counsel attempted to contact Defendant’s counsel, Plaintiff had not received any responses as of the date she filed the Motions.  (See Simonian Decl. ¶¶ 5-9.) 

As they are unopposed, the Court GRANTS the Motions.  (Sexton v. Superior Court (1997) 58 Cal.App.4th 1403, 1410.)  Defendant is ordered to submit responses to the discovery requests discussed in the Motion to Compel within 20 days of this order.  The RFAs at issue in the RFA Motion are deemed admitted.

Monetary Sanctions

            Plaintiff requests a total of $3,250 in monetary sanctions in connection to the Motion to Compel.  This amount represents: (1) 3 hours preparing the moving papers; and (2) an anticipated 3.5 hours reviewing opposition papers, drafting reply papers, and appearing at the hearing at an hourly rate of $500 per hour. (Simonian Decl. ¶ 10.) 

Plaintiff also requests a total of $3,350 in monetary sanctions in connection to the RFA Motion.  This amount represents: (1) 3.2 hours drafting the moving papers; and (2) an anticipated 3.5 hours reviewing opposition papers, drafting reply papers, and appearing at the hearing at an hourly rate of $500 per hour.  (RFA Simonian Decl. ¶ 10.)

The Court exercises its discretion and awards Plaintiff sanctions in the reasonable amount of $1,500, which represents three hours drafting the Motions collectively at an hourly rate of $500 per hour.  (Moran v. Oso Valley Greenbelt Assn. (2004) 117 Cal.App.4th 1029, 1034.)  Defendant is ordered to pay this amount within 20 days of this order.

             Moving party is ordered to give notice of this ruling.

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.

       Dated this 22nd day of February 2023