Judge Joel R Wohlfeil, Case Number: 37-2021-00000121-CU-PO-CTL, Date: 2024-06-07 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Joel R Wohlfeil, Case: 37-2021-00000121-CU-PO-CTL, Date: 2024-06-07 Tentative Ruling

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,

DEPT.:

EVENT DATE:

EVENT TIME:

HALL OF JUSTICE

TENTATIVE RULINGS - June 04, 2024

06/07/2024 09:00:00 AM C-73 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

JUDICIAL OFFICER:Joel R. Wohlfeil

CASE NO.:

CASE CATEGORY:

EVENT TYPE:

CASE TITLE: CASE TYPE:

Civil - Unlimited PI/PD/WD - Other Motion Hearing (Civil) 37-2021-00000121-CU-PO-CTL HILDEBRAND VS OVERTURE SAN MARCOS [IMAGED] CAUSAL DOCUMENT/DATE FILED: Motion - Other, 05/09/2024

The Motion (ROA # 157) of Plaintiff NANCY HILDEBRAND ('Plaintiff') for an order for leave to withdraw the responses to Requests for Admissions, Set One propounded by Defendant SHERI BLEAU ('Defendant'), is DENIED.

'A party may withdraw or amend an admission made in response to a request for admission only on leave of court granted after notice to all parties.' Code Civ. Proc. 2033.300(a).

'The court may permit withdrawal or amendment of an admission only if it determines that the admission was the result of mistake, inadvertence, or excusable neglect, and that the party who obtained the admission will not be substantially prejudiced in maintaining that party's action or defense on the merits.' Id. at (b).

Section 2033.300(a) permits amendment or withdrawal of 'deemed admissions' ordered by the court under section 2033.280(b), as well as admissions expressly made by a party. See Wilcox v. Birtwhistle (1999) 21 Cal. 4th 973, 979.

The statutory language 'mistake, inadvertence, or excusable neglect' is identical to some of the language used in section 473(b), which states that a court may 'relieve a party ... from a judgment, dismissal, order, or other proceeding taken against him or her through his or her mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect.' New Albertsons, Inc. v. Superior Court (2008) 168 Cal. App. 4th 1403, 1418, 1419.

The use of identical terms in two different statutes serving similar purposes suggests that the Legislature intended those terms to have the same meaning in both statutes. Id. at 1419.

Section 2033.300 is designed to eliminate undeserved windfalls obtained through requests for admission and to further the policy favoring resolution of lawsuits on the merits. Id. at 1420.

Therefore, any doubts must be resolved in favor of the party seeking relief. Id. Denial of a motion to withdraw or amend an admission 'is limited to circumstances where it is clear that the mistake, inadvertence, or neglect was inexcusable, or where it is clear that the withdrawal or amendment would substantially prejudice the party who obtained the admission in maintaining that party's action or defense on the merits.' Id. at 1420, 1421.

Calendar No.: Event ID: TENTATIVE RULINGS

3115438 CASE NUMBER: CASE TITLE: HILDEBRAND VS OVERTURE SAN MARCOS [IMAGED] 37-2021-00000121-CU-PO-CTL The requests for admission were originally served on October 24, 2022. After an extension, the responses were due on December 5, 2022. However, only objections were served at that time.

Defendants provided additional extensions, but ultimately filed a Motion seeking to deem the requests admitted on April 10, 2023. Plaintiff did not submit written oppositions to this Motion or serve the late responses in lieu of an opposition. On May 12, 2023, this Court granted the Motion to deem the requests admitted.

The declaration of counsel states that counsel lost contact with Plaintiff until November 5, 2023. Plaintiff was suffering from 'numerous health issues and was hospitalized from July 21, 2023, to August 21, 2023.' Plaintiff continues to experience 'ongoing health concerns and disabilities.' Also, 'during the end of 2023 into the beginning of 2024' Plaintiff's counsel 'was also suffering from medical illness.' For purposes of this Motion, the only time frame that matters is the period from October 24, 2022 to May 12, 2023. The requests would not have been deemed admitted if substantive responses had been served at any time before the Motion was granted on May 12, 2023. Plaintiff's hospitalization in July and August of 2023 is immaterial. Counsel's medical issues from late 2023 until early 2024 are immaterial.

Counsel's declaration demonstrates that substantive responses were not served prior to May 12, 2023 for two potential reasons. First, counsel lost contact with Plaintiff during this time. Second, plaintiff may have been suffering from 'numerous health issues.' However, it is not stated whether counsel lost contact with plaintiff for the entire period of October 24, 2022 to May 12, 2023.

There is no declaration from Plaintiff explaining the reasons why Plaintiff did not maintain contact with counsel, provide counsel with updated contact information, and/or proactively work with counsel to litigate this action. There is also no statement from Plaintiff specifically stating that she suffered from one or more medical conditions for the entire period of October 24, 2022 to May 12, 2023, and this rendered her unable to work with her counsel to prepare discovery responses for this entire period.

Given this incomplete record, the Court is unable to conclude that the failure to serve responses to the requests for admission resulted from Plaintiff's mistake, inadvertence or excusable neglect. The Motion is denied on this basis.

Calendar No.: Event ID: TENTATIVE RULINGS

3115438