Judge: Jill Feeney, Case: 21STCV41079, Date: 2023-04-17 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV41079    Hearing Date: April 17, 2023    Dept: 30

Department 30, Spring Street Courthouse

April 17, 2023

21STCV41079

-Motion to Compel Plaintiff’s Responses to Form Interrogatories (Set One) and Request for Monetary Sanctions filed by Defendant

-Motion to Compel Plaintiff’s Responses to Special Interrogatories (Set One) and Request for Monetary Sanctions filed by Defendant

-Motion to Compel Plaintiff’s Responses to Request for Production (Set One) and Request for Monetary Sanctions filed by Defendant

DECISION

The three motions are granted.

The requests for sanctions are denied.

Plaintiff is ordered to serve verified responses without objections within 10 days after the date of this order.

Moving party is to provide notice within one court day after the date of this order and to file proof of service of such notice within five court days after the date of this order.

DISCUSSION

Defendant moves to compel Plaintiff’s responses to SROGs, FROGs, and RPDs.

Defendant’s counsel testifies that she propounded requests for written discovery on Plaintiff on February 2, 2022. (Bui Decl., ¶2.) Plaintiff’s counsel requested an extension to April 11, 2022, which Defendant’s counsel granted. (Id., ¶4.) After receiving no response, Defendant called and emailed Plaintiff’s counsel regarding the delinquent responses. (Id., ¶5.) On May 11, 2022, Plaintiff’s counsel served Plaintiff’s medical records, but failed to serve any other responses or verifications. (Id., ¶6.) Defendant’s counsel met and conferred with Plaintiff’s counsel in September 2022 and again in October 2022. (Id., ¶7-8.) To date, Plaintiff has not served responses to FROGs, SROGs, and RPDs.

Although Plaintiff served copies of medical records, the records are not verified and are therefore tantamount to no response at all. Because Plaintiff has not served any response to Defendant’s discovery requests, Defendant’s motions are granted.

Discovery sanctions may not be imposed under Section 2023.030, even together with Section 2023.010, absent another provision of the Discovery Act that authorizes the imposition of sanctions. (City of Los Angeles v. PricewaterhouseCoopers, LLC (2022) 84 Cal.App.5th 466, 500.) Sanctions for with respect to the interrogatories and the request for production are only authorized against a party who unsuccessfully makes or opposes a motion to compel responses. (See Code of Civil Procedure Sections 2030.290(c) and 2031.300(c)). Here, sanctions are denied because these motions are unopposed.