Judge: John C. Gastelum, Case: 22-01258334, Date: 2023-08-01 Tentative Ruling
(1) Motion to Compel Answers to Form Irogs (2) Motion to Compel Answers to Special Irogs (3) Motion to Compel Production (4) Motion to Compel Response to RFAs (5) CMC
Tentative Ruling: Plaintiff PTA Real Estate, LLC (“Plaintiff”) filed Motions to Compel Responses to form interrogatories, set one, special interrogatories, set one, and requests for production, set one as well as a Motion to Deem Requests for Admission, Set One admitted. Plaintiff seeks $2,460 in total sanctions for all four motions.
The Motions are GRANTED.
I. Defense Counsel Failed to Sign the Oppositions
Code of Civil Procedure section 128.7 requires that “[e]very pleading, petition, written notice of motion, or other similar paper shall be signed by at least one attorney of record in the attorney's individual name, or, if the party is not represented by an attorney, shall be signed by the party.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 128.7, subd. (a).) Section 128.7(a) further states that an “unsigned paper shall be stricken unless omission of the signature is corrected promptly after being called to the attention of the attorney or party.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 128.7, subd. (a).) Here, defense counsel failed to sign the oppositions (although the declarations in support of the opposition were signed).
II. Motions to Compel
Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure sections 2030.290 and 2031.300, a party who fails to serve timely responses to interrogatories or requests for production waives any objection to the requested discovery. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.290, subd. (a) and 2031.300, subd. (a).) The party propounding the interrogatories or requests for production may move for an order compelling responses to the discovery. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.290, subd. (b) and 2031.300, subd. (b).)
Unverified responses are tantamount to no response. (Melendrez v. Superior Court (2013) 215 Cal.App.4th 1343, 1348; Appleton v. Superior Court (1988) 206 Cal.App.3d 632, 636; Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.250, subd. (a).)
If responses contain both answers (i.e., fact-specific responses) and objections, the portion containing answers must be verified, but there is no need to verify that portion containing the objections. (See Food 4 Less Supermarkets, Inc. v. Superior Court (1995) 40 Cal.App.4th 651, 657.) However, the attorney for the responding party shall sign any responses that contain an objection. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.250, subd. (c).)
“Unlike a motion to compel further responses, a motion to compel responses is not subject to a 45–day time limit, and the propounding party does not have to demonstrate either good cause or that it satisfied a ‘meet and confer’ requirement.” (Sinaiko Healthcare Consulting, Inc. v. Pacific Healthcare Consultants (2007) 148 Cal.App.4th 390, 404.)
Here, Defendant did not serve responses by the extended due date. Because no responses were provided, a meet and confer was not required. Accordingly, the Motions to Compel responses without objections to form interrogatories, set one, special interrogatories, set one, and requests for production, set one are GRANTED. Defendant shall provide code compliant responses without objections within 20 days of the notice of ruling.
The court notes that Defendant attached its responses to form interrogatories set, one and requests for production, set one, which Defendant states were respectively served on February 1, 2023 and February 8, 2023. However, these responses contain neither a verification nor an attorney signature for the objections and are therefore tantamount to no response.
II. Motion to Deem Facts Admitted
Code of Civil Procedure section 2033.280 provides that if a party to whom requests for admission are directed fails to serve a timely response, the party waives any objection to the requests. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.280.) The requesting party may also move for an order that the genuineness of documents and the truth of any matters specified in the requests be deemed admitted. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.280(a)-(b).)
Importantly, under the plain language of the statute, granting the motion is mandatory unless 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).) The section 2033.280 states:
“The court shall make this order, 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.” (Ibid., emphasis added.)
Here, Defendant has not established that it served responses in substantial compliance with section 2033.220. Unless Defendant provides responses in substantial compliance with section 2033.220 to requests for admission, set one before the hearing on the Motion, the Motion to Deem Facts Admitted will be GRANTED and the requests for admission, set one will be deemed admitted.
III. Sanctions
Monetary sanctions are mandatory against any party, person, or attorney who unsuccessfully makes or opposes a motion to compel responses to interrogatories or requests for production, unless the court finds that the one subject to the sanctions acted with substantial justification or that other circumstances make the imposition of the sanctions unjust. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.290, subd. (c) and 2031.300, subd. (c).)
Similarly, monetary sanctions are also mandatory against the party or attorney who necessitated the motion to deem facts admitted 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., § 2033.280(c).)
Plaintiff’s request for monetary sanctions is GRANTED in the amount of $2,460, which shall be paid to Plaintiff within 20 days of the notice of ruling.
Plaintiff to give notice.