Judge: Joel L. Lofton, Case: 23AHCV02082, Date: 2024-07-03 Tentative Ruling


Case Number: 23AHCV02082    Hearing Date: July 3, 2024    Dept: X

   Tentative Ruling 

 

Judge Joel L. Lofton, Department X 

 

 

HEARING DATE:     July 3, 2024                                        TRIAL DATE: October 22, 2024  

 

CASE:                         SOTO, et al. v. FCA US LLC, et al.

 

CASE NO.:                 23AHCV02082 

 

 

 

MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSES SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES (9969)

 

MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSES TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION (5901)

 

 

MOVING PARTY:                Plaintiffs Ramon Soto and Michelle Soto

 

RESPONDING PARTY:       Defendant FCA US LLC

 

SERVICE:                              Filed April 2 and 4, 2024

 

OPPOSITION:                      Filed June 20, 2024

 

REPLY:                                  Filed June 26, 2024

  

RELIEF REQUESTED  

 

            Plaintiffs moves for an order compelling further responses to special interrogatories and request for production of documents.

  

BACKGROUND 

 

This case arises out of Plaintiffs Ramon Soto and Michelle Soto’s (collectively “Plaintiffs”) lemon law claim for a 2022 Jeep Compass (the “Subject Vehicle”). Plaintiffs filed their complaint against Defendant FCA US LLC (“Defendant”) on September 11, 2023. Now, Plaintiffs seek to compel further responses to special interrogatories and request for production of documents from Defendant. Plaintiffs request sanctions in connection with their motions. Defendant filed an opposition brief, and Plaintiffs filed a reply brief.

 

TENTATIVE RULING 

 

             

Plaintiffs’ motion to compel Defendant’s further responses to Plaintiffs’ Special Interrogatory numbers 45–48 is DENIED.

 

Plaintiffs’ motion to compel Defendant’s further responses to Plaintiffs’ Request for Production is GRANTED as to number 45 and DENIED as to number 46.

 

Plaintiffs’ request for sanctions is DENIED.

  

   

LEGAL STANDARD 

 

A motion to compel a further response is used when a party gives unsatisfactory answers or makes untenable objections to interrogatories, demands to produce, or requests for admission. (See Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.310, subd. (a); Sinaiko Healthcare Consulting, Inc. v. Pacific Healthcare Consultants (2007) 148 Cal.App.4th 390, 403.) 

 

To request further production, a movant must establish: (1) good cause for the production (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.310, subd. (b)(1); Sinaiko, supra, at p. 403); and (2) that a further response is needed because (a) the responding party’s statement of compliance with the demand to produce is incomplete Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.310, subd. (a)(1)), (b) the responding party’s representation that it is unable to comply is inadequate, complete, or evasive (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.310, subd. (a)(2)), (c) the responding party’s objection in the response is without merit or is too general (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.310, subd. (a)(3); Catalina Island Yacht Club v. Superior Court (2015) 242 Cal.App.4th 1116, 1127), or (d) if the responding party objected to the production of ESI on the ground that it is not reasonably accessible the movant can show that the (i) ESI is reasonably accessible or (ii) there is good cause for production of the ESI regardless of its accessibility (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.310, subd. (e)). 

 

MEET AND CONFER

 

A motion to compel further responses to requests for production of documents must be accompanied by a meet and confer declaration. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.310, subd. (b)(2).)

 

The court finds that the meet and confer requirement has been met. (Powell Decl. ¶¶ 5-8.)

 

DISCUSSION 

 

SPECIAL INTERRGATORIES

 

SROG No. 45: At the time of release for the 2022 Jeep Compass vehicles, state your anticipated range for repairs per thousand vehicles sold (R/1000).

 

SROG No. 46: State the repairs per thousand vehicles sold (R/1000) for 2022 Jeep Compass vehicles.

 

SROG No. 47: Identify in order the five symptoms with the highest repairs per thousand (R/1000) for 2022 Jeep Compass vehicles, and the corresponding repairs per thousand.

 

SROG No. 48: Identify in order the five components with the highest repairs per thousand (R/1000) for 2022 Jeep Compass vehicles, and the corresponding repairs per thousand.

 

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION

 

RFP No. 45: All DOCUMENTS evidencing complaints by owners of the 2022 Jeep Compass vehicle regarding any of the complaints that the SUBJECT VEHICLE was presented to YOUR or YOUR authorized repair facilities for repair during the warranty period.

 

RFP No. 46: All DOCUMENTS evidencing warranty repairs to 2022 Jeep Compass vehicles regarding any of the components that YOU or YOUR authorized repair facilities performed repairs on under warranty.

 

Here, the Court finds that the subject interrogatories, as written are overly broad in scope, as they are not limited to any relevant time frame or any specific claim, repair, or component of similar vehicles. Accordingly, the Court sustains Defendant’s objections thereto and denies Plaintiffs’ motion to compel Defendant’s further responses to Plaintiffs’ Special Interrogatory numbers 45–48.

 

As to the subject request for production, the Court finds that request number 45 is relevant and properly limited to vehicles of the same make and model as Plaintiffs’ and to complaints that the Subject Vehicle was presented for; however, request number 46 is not limited to any specific claim of defect, repair or component. Accordingly, the Court grants Plaintiffs’ motion to compel Defendant’s further responses to Plaintiffs’ Request for Production as to number 45 and denies the motion as to number 46.

 

Plaintiffs request sanctions in the total amount of $5,220 ($2,610 x 2 motions) to be imposed on Defendant and its attorney. The request for sanctions is denied as the motions are denied and granted in part, and because the court finds that the parties’ dispute regarding the subject discovery was in good faith.

 

CONCLUSION 

 

Plaintiffs’ motion to compel Defendant’s further responses to Plaintiffs’ Special Interrogatory numbers 45–48 is DENIED.

 

Plaintiffs’ motion to compel Defendant’s further responses to Plaintiffs’ Request for Production is GRANTED as to number 45 and DENIED as to number 46.

 

Plaintiffs’ request for sanctions is DENIED.

 

  

            Moving Party to give notice.

 

Dated:   July 3, 2024                                       ___________________________________ 

Joel L. Lofton 

Judge of the Superior Court 

 
 
 

 

 

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the court indicating their

intention to submit.  alhdeptx@lacourt.org