Judge: Jill Feeney, Case: 22STCV16439, Date: 2023-04-06 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 22STCV16439 Hearing Date: April 6, 2023 Dept: 30
Department 30, Spring Street Courthouse
April 6, 2023
22STCV16439
Motion to Compel Responses to Form Interrogatories and Special Interrogatories filed by Plaintiff George Salman
DECISION
Per Plaintiff’s filing on March 23, 2023, the motion is denied as moot. The issue to be decided is the imposition of sanctions.
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.) Sanctions with respect to interrogatories 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).). Here, Plaintiff’s motions were unsuccessful. Because Defendant had not served responses to discovery requests when Plaintiff filed these motions, Plaintiff was substantially justified in making the motion. However, the Court cannot award Plaintiff sanctions because these motions were denied.
Moving party to provide notice.
