Judge: John J. Kralik, Case: 23BBCV02111, Date: 2024-02-02 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23BBCV02111    Hearing Date: February 2, 2024    Dept: NCB

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

North Central District

Department B

BACKGROUND

A.    Allegations

Plaintiff Philippe Emile Van Doorne (“Plaintiff) alleges that on July 8, 2023, he acquired a Triumph Trident 660 vehicle.  Plaintiff alleges that he was a buyer and that Defendant Triumph Motorcycles (America) LTD (“TMA”) was a warrantor and Defendant BMW Motorcycles of Burbank (“BMW MB”) was a manufacturer/distributor.  Plaintiff alleges that Defendants violated the Song Beverly Act by failing to conform the vehicle to the express warranties within a reasonable number of repair attempts or within the warranty periods, and by failing to promptly replace the vehicle or make restitution to Plaintiff.  He alleges that they breached the implied warranty of merchantability because the vehicle had malfunctions and nonconformities. 

The complaint, filed September 14, 2023, alleges causes of action for: (1) violation of the Song-Beverly Act – breach of express warranty; (2) violation of the Song-Beverly Act – breach of implied warranty; (3) violation of Business & Professions Code, § 17200; and (4) negligent repair. 

B.     Motion on Calendar

On December 5, 2023, Defendants TMA and BMWMB filed a motion for a protective order.

The Court is not in receipt of an opposition brief.

DISCUSSION

            Defendants move for a protective order to protect them from having to respond to written discovery or, alternatively, for an order limiting the amount and scope of Plaintiff’s SROGs, set one, RFA, set one, FROG, set one, and RPD, set one.  Defendants argue that the only conceivable reason for Plaintiff to propound this discovery is to justify a disproportionately high claim of attorney’s fees (despite Defendants’ attempt to settle the case within 10 days of being served with the complaint).  They also argue that the discovery requests seek irrelevant subject matter. 

            Defendants argue that Plaintiff has served FROGs on both Defendants, 62 RFAs on TMA, 121 SROGs on TMA, 84 RPDs on TMA, 30 RFAs to BMWMB, 32 SROGs on BMWMB, and 35 RPDs on BMWMB. 

            Here, the Court declines to grant the motion outright so that Defendants can avoid responding to all written discovery.  However, the Court will grant Defendants’ alternative request to limit the amount of discovery propounded on them. 

With respect to the RFA, SROG, and RPDs propounded on BMWMB, 30 RFAs, 32, SROGs, and 35 RPDs is reasonable in number.  Pursuant to CCP §§ 2030.030 and 2033.030, a party may propound up to 35 SROGs and RFAs.  (In contrast, there is no code limitation for the number of RPDs propounded.)  As the number of written discovery propounded on BMWMB is within the appropriate range, the Court will allow these written discovery requests to go forward.  If BMWMB objects to the content of the discovery, it may respond/object appropriately to the requests. 

With respect to the written discovery propounded on TMA, 62 RFAs, 121 SROGs, and 84 RPDs is unreasonable in amount and the Court will limit the number of discovery requests propounded by Plaintiff on TMA to 35 RFAs, 35 SROGs, and 35 RPDs.  Plaintiff should pick the requests that it deems relevant and sufficiently tailored to this action and re-propound them on TMA, or re-draft the written discovery (within the number limitation).

The parties should make efforts to meet and confer about the relevant discovery at issue.  Defendants’ motion provides a summary of Defendants’ arguments regarding what discovery requests are duplicative and could be consolidated and what it believes are beyond the scope and not relevant to this action. 

            No sanctions were requested. 

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

            Defendants Triumph Motorcycles (America) LTD and BMW Motorcycles of Burbank’s motion for protective order is granted in part and denied in part.  The motion is granted such that the Court will issue a limited protective order such that the written discovery propounded on Triumph Motorcycles (America) LTD shall be limited to 35 RFAs, 35 SROGs, and 35 RPDs.  If Plaintiff is in need of more discovery, Plaintiff may request with the Court and provide a showing for additional discovery.  Defendant BMW Motorcycles of Burbank is ordered to respond to the 30 RFAs, 32, SROGs, and 35 RPDs propounded by Plaintiff.  The remainder of the motion is denied.

            Defendants shall provide notice of this order.                

DATED:  February 2, 2024                                        ___________________________

                                                                              John J. Kralik

                                                                              Judge of the Superior Court