Judge: John J. Kralik, Case: 23BBCV00960, Date: 2023-10-13 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23BBCV00960    Hearing Date: October 13, 2023    Dept: NCB

 

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

North Central District

Department B

 

 

andrius kantas,

                        Plaintiff,

            v.

 

neutron holdings, inc., et al.,

 

                        Defendants.

 

  Case No.:  22BBCV00960

 

  Hearing Date:  October 13, 2023

 

 [TENTATIVE] order RE:

motions to compel responses; motion to compel deposition

 

 

BACKGROUND

A.    Allegations

Plaintiff Andrius Kantas (“Plaintiff”) allege that on November 22, 2020, he was operating a scooter owned by Defendant Neutron Holdings, Inc. (“NHI”) and Defendant Lime.  Plaintiff alleges that he was injured as a result of the failure of essential safety systems and poor maintenance of the scooter. 

The complaint, filed November 9, 2022, alleges causes of action for: (1) negligence; (2) strict products liability – design defect; (3) strict products liability – failure to warn; and (4) breach of implied warranty of merchantability.

B.     Motions on Calendar

On August 8, 2023, Defendant NHI dba Lime (“Defendant”) filed 2 motions to compel Plaintiff’s initial responses to: (1) Form and Special Interrogatories (“FROG” and “SROG”); and (2) Requests for Production of Documents (“RPD”).  The motions are not opposed.

On August 8, 2023, Defendant filed a motion to compel the deposition of Plaintiff.  The motion is not opposed.

The Court notes that Plaintiff is now a self-represented litigant.  On June 12, 2023, the Court granted Plaintiff’s then-counsel’s request to be relieved as counsel. 

DISCUSSION RE MOTIONS TO COMPEL INITIAL RESPONSES

Defendant moves to compel Plaintiff’s initial responses to the FROG, SROG, and RPD requests. 

On February 17, 2023, Defendant served on Plaintiff the discovery requests, such that responses were due by March 21, 2023.  Defense counsel sent a letter to Plaintiff’s counsel requesting responses to the discovery, but Plaintiff’s counsel informed defense counsel that he would be withdrawing from the case.  On June 1, 2023, Defendant sent Plaintiff copies of the discovery requests, requesting that responses be provided by June 23, 2023.  As of the filing of the motions, Defendant states that it has not received responses from Plaintiff. 

Defendant’s unopposed motions to compel responses to the FROG, SROG, and RPD are granted pursuant to CCP §§ 2030.290 and 2031.300.  Plaintiff is ordered to provide verified responses to Defendant’s discovery requests, without objections, within 20 days of notice of this order. 

            No sanctions were requested.

DISCUSSION RE MOTION TO COMPEL DEPOSITION

            Defendant moves to compel Plaintiff’s appearance at his deposition within 10 days of the Court’s hearing on this motion.

            Defendant argues that it served the notice of deposition of Plaintiff on June 1, 2023, scheduling his deposition for June 20, 2023.  Defendant states that Plaintiff did not serve any objections to the deposition notice.  On June 19, 2023, Defendant sent Plaintiff a Zoom link for his remote deposition.  However, Defendant did not receive any response from Plaintiff.  Defendant states that it attended the June 20, 2023 deposition, but Plaintiff did not appear.

            As Plaintiff did not attend his properly noticed deposition, the motion to compel Plaintiff’s deposition is granted. 

            No sanctions were requested.

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

Defendant Neutron Holdings, Inc. dba Lime’s two motions to compel responses to the FROG, SROG, and RPD are granted.  Plaintiff is ordered to provide verified responses to Defendant’s discovery requests, without objections, within 20 days of notice of this order. 

Defendant’s motion to compel Plaintiff’s attendance at his deposition is granted.  The Court notes that no trial date has been set and there is a Case Management Conference set for November 9, 2023.  As such, there is still sufficient time to conduct Plaintiff’s deposition.  Defendant is directed to serve an amended notice of Plaintiff’s remote deposition via email and mail so that Plaintiff is on notice of the Court’s order and his scheduled deposition date.  Defendant may set Plaintiff’s deposition for a date 15 days after the hearing of this motion so that Plaintiff has sufficient notice and may make arrangements for obtaining counsel.

Defendant shall provide notice of this order.