Judge: John J. Kralik, Case: 21BBCV01045, Date: 2024-01-12 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21BBCV01045    Hearing Date: January 12, 2024    Dept: NCB

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

North Central District

Department B

BACKGROUND

A.    Allegations

            Plaintiff Creditors Adjustment Bureau, Inc. (“Plaintiff”) alleges that it was assigned the debt of $313,014.75 for Policy No. 9254579-19 and the debt of $7,812.38 for Policy No. 9254579-20 from its assignor, State Compensation Insurance Fund.  Plaintiff alleges that the due date for the first policy was January 11, 2021 and the due date for the second policy was July 6, 2021.  Plaintiff alleges that its assignor and Defendants CNA Partners, Inc. aka CNA Partners Inc dba Property Damages Specialists (“CNA Partners”), PDS Construction Inc aka Property Damage Specialists aka Property Damages Specialist (“PDS”), and GLA Puroclean, Inc. dba Puroclean dba Puroclean of North Hollywood (“Puroclean”) entered into a written agreement wherein Plaintiff’s assignor agreed to provide policies of workers compensation insurance to Defendants in the aforementioned two policies.  Plaintiff alleges Defendants breached the policies by failing to make the required payment of premiums assessed after audit by Plaintiff’s assignor.   

            The first amended complaint (“FAC”), filed May 15, 2023, alleges causes of action for: (1) breach of contract; (2) open book account; (3) account stated; and (4) reasonable value.

            On September 6, 2023, the default of CNA Partners, Inc. aka CNA Partners Inc dba Property Damages Specialists was entered. 

B.     Motion on Calendar  

On November 15, 2023, Plaintiff filed a motion to compel GLA Puroclean, Inc.’s compliance on failure to produce documents in accordance with responses to Plaintiff’s first demand for identification, production, inspection, and copying of documents and other things (“DPD”).  Plaintiff also requests sanctions in the amount of $2,072.27. 

On January 3, 2024, Puroclean filed an untimely “Limited Non-Opposition” brief.

On January 5, 2024, Plaintiff filed a reply brief.

LEGAL STANDARD

CCP § 2031.320(a) states: “If a party filing a response to a demand for inspection, copying, testing, or sampling under Sections 2031.210, 2031.220, 2031.230, 2031.240, and 2031.280 thereafter fails to permit the inspection, copying, testing, or sampling in accordance with that party's statement of compliance, the demanding party may move for an order compelling compliance.” 

DISCUSSION

            Plaintiff moves to compel Puroclean’s compliance with Plaintiff’s DPD, set one.  Plaintiff states that it served the DPD on Puroclean on August 28, 2023 and it received Puroclean’s written responses on September 28, 2023.  Plaintiff states, however, that Puroclean failed to produce documentation in response to DPD Nos. 1-3, 5-9, 11-14, 16-18, 20-27, and 31 even though Puroclean responded that it would produce documents.  (Mot., Ex. 2.)   Plaintiff states that it gave Puroclean nearly a month to send the documents, it attempted to meet and confer with defense counsel, and provided an extension.  However, as of the date of the filing of the motion, Puroclean has not provided responsive documents. 

            In its limited non-opposition brief, Puroclean states that responsive documents have been produced and requests that sanctions to Plaintiff be limited to 2 hours spent to prepare a 5-page motion. 

            Based on Puroclean’s responses to the DPD, it appears that Puroclean intended to provide responsive documents but has failed to do so.  As such, the motion to compel compliance is granted.

            Plaintiff seeks $2,072.27 in sanctions against Puroclean and its counsel of record.  The Court grants the request for sanctions in the reasonable sum of $1,000 in attorney’s fees and $72.27 in filing fees for this motion.  If there are further discovery disputes between the parties, the Court may be inclined to consider increased sanctions amounts. 

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

Plaintiff Creditors Adjustment Bureau, Inc.’s motion to compel Defendant GLA Puroclean, Inc. dba Puroclean dba Puroclean of North Hollywood’s compliance on failure to produce documents in accordance with responses to Plaintiff’s first demand for identification, production, inspection, and copying of documents and other things is granted.  Defendant is ordered to produce documents in response to Plaintiff’s DPD requests within 20 days of notice of this order. 

Puroclean and its counsel of record, jointly and severally, are ordered to pay monetary sanctions in the amount of $1,072.27 to Plaintiff, by and through counsel, within 20 days of notice of this order.

Plaintiff shall provide notice of this order.

Warning regarding electronic appearances:  All software for remote or electronic appearances is subject to malfunction based on system weakness and human error, which can originate from any of the multiple parties participating each morning. The seamless operation of the Court’s electronic appearance software is dependent on numerous inconstant and fluctuating factors that may impact whether you, or other counsel or the Court itself can be heard in a particular case. Not all these factors are within the control of the courtroom staff. For example, at times, the system traps participants in electronic purgatories where they cannot be heard and where the courtroom staff is not aware of their presence. If you call the courtroom, please be respectful of the fact that a court hearing is going on, and that the courtroom staff is doing their best to use an imperfect system. If it is truly important to you to be heard, please show up to the courtroom in the normal way. Parking is free or reasonable in Burbank.

DATED:  January 12, 2024                                        ___________________________

                                                                              John Kralik

                                                                              Judge of the Superior Court