Judge: Jill Feeney, Case: 20STCV26033, Date: 2022-10-03 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 20STCV26033 Hearing Date: October 3, 2022 Dept: 30
Department 30, Spring Street Courthouse
October 3, 2022
20STCV26033
-Motion to Deem Requests for Admission (Set One) as to Plaintiff Nateras Deemed Admitted and Request for Sanctions filed by Defendants Natalie Obradavich and James Obradavich
-Motion to Deem Requests for Admission (Set One) as to Plaintiff Vitale Deemed Admitted and Request for Sanctions filed by Defendants Natalie Obradavich and James Obradavich
DECISION
Both motions are granted.
Sanctions in the amount of $361.65 are imposed jointly and severally on Plaintiff Nateras and Plaintiff’s counsel of record.
Sanctions in the amount of $361.65 are imposed jointly and severally on Plaintiff Vitale and Plaintiff’s counsel of record.
Sanctions are due within 20 days after the date of this order.
Moving party is ordered to provide notice and to file proof of service of such notice within five court days after the date of this order.
Background
This is an action for negligence arising from a vehicle collision which took place in July 2018. Plaintiffs Gabriella Nateras and Kelly Vitale filed their Complaint against Defendants Natalie and James Obradovich on July 10, 2020.
Defendants filed the instant motion to deem requests for admissions admitted on June 23, 2022.
Summary
Moving Arguments
Defendants served their Request for Admissions, Set No.1 on Plaintiffs Gabriella Nateras and Kelly Vitale on April 4, 2022. To date, Plaintiffs have not responded.
Opposing Arguments
None.
Legal Standard
Deem Requests for Admissions Admitted
Where there has been no timely response to requests for admissions, a “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 under Chapter 7 (commencing with section 2023.010).” The court “shall” grant the motion to deem requests for admission 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.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.280(c).)
Sanctions
Sanctions may be imposed for misuse of discovery process. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2023.030, subd. (a). ) Failing to respond or to submit to an authorized method of discovery constitutes a misuse of the discovery process. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2023.010, subd. (d).) Sanctions are mandatory in connection with a motion to deem matters specified in a request for admissions as true and motions to compel responses to interrogatories and requests for production of documents against any party, person, or attorney who unsuccessfully makes or opposes a motion to compel unless the court “finds that the one subject to the sanction acted with substantial justification or that other circumstances make the imposition of the sanction unjust.” (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.290(c), 2031.300(c), 2033.280(c).)
Discussion
Defendants move to deem their Request for Admissions, Set No. 1, admitted.
Defendants are entitled to orders deeming its Request for Admissions, Set No.1 admitted. Defendants support their claims with a declaration from Counsel. Defendants served their Requests for Admissions, Set No.1 on April 4, 2022 with responses due on May 9, 2022. (Martin Decl., ¶¶3-4.) On May 3, 2022, Defendants granted an extension of time to May 23, 2022. (Id., ¶5.) To date, Plaintiffs have not responded to Defendants’ discovery requests, nor have Defendants received any further communication from Plaintiffs. (Id., ¶6.)
Because Plaintiffs provided no response to Defendants’ Request for Admissions, Set No.1, Defendants’ motion is granted. The genuineness of any documents and the truth of any matters specified in Defendants’ motions are admitted.
With respect to sanctions, the Court finds that Plaintiffs misused the discovery process by failing to respond to Defendants’ discovery requests. Defendants request sanctions in the amount of $800 per motion at an hourly rate of $150 per hour plus the filing expense of $61.65 per motion. (Martin Decl., ¶8.) Because the motions was unopposed, are relatively simple, and are essentially, identical the Court awards sanctions in the amount of $361.65 per motion (2 hours of time plus the filing fee).
