Judge: Jon R. Takasugi, Case: 19STCV33111, Date: 2024-01-10 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 19STCV33111 Hearing Date: January 10, 2024 Dept: 17
Superior Court of California
County of Los Angeles
TENTATIVE RULING
DEPARTMENT
17
|
PRINCESS OBIENU
vs. COUNTY OF LOS
ANGELES |
Case
No.: 19STCV33111 Hearing Date: January 10, 2024 |
Plaintiff’s motion to compel
responses is DENIED.
On September
17, 2019, Plaintiff Princess Obienu (Plaintiff) filed suit against the County
of Los Angeles Department of Health Services (Defendant), alleging: (1)
race/national origin discrimination; (2) disability discrimination; (3) failure
to accommodate disability; (4) failure to engage in the interactive process;
(5) violation of the California Family Rights Act (CFRA); (6) violation of the
CFRA – Interference with Family Leave Rights; (7) violation of CFRA –
retaliation; (8) failure to prevent/correct discrimination; and (9)
retaliation.
Now,
Plaintiff moves to compel responses to her special interrogatories.
Discussion
Plaintiff
moves to compel responses to her special interrogatories.
As
noted by Defendant, Plaintiff’s counsel filed this motion on 8/29/2023, after
the date set for trial.
CCP section
2024.020 provides that discovery motions must be heard on or before the 15th
day before the trial date. In this case, trial was set for August 21, 2023. As
such, any discovery motion had to be noticed for hearing on or before August 6,
2023, and served no later than July 14, 2023. Plaintiff’s counsel served it
over two months later and noticed it to be heard after the aborted trial
concluded. As the Court of Appeal has ruled, “a party who notices a discovery
motion to be heard after the discovery motion cutoff date does not have a right
to have the motion heard.” (Cottini v. Enloe Med. Ctr. (2014) 226 Cal.
App. 4th 401, 420, quoting Pelton-Shepherd Industries, Inc. v. Delta
Packaging Products, Inc. (2008) 165 Cal.App.4th 1568, 1586.)
Although
discovery may have been reopened following the grant of a mistrial on September
29, 2023 (see Fairmont Ins. Co. v. Superior Court (2000) 22 Cal. 4th
245), the present motion is still untimely, because it was served before the
Court declared the mistrial and relates to discovery proceedings that took
place long before the date initially set for trial. (See Golf & Tennis
Pro Shop, Inc. v. Superior Court (2022) 84 Cal. App. 5th 127, 137
(discovery motion deadlines are “mandatory and the court may not entertain a
belated motion to compel”).)
Based on the
foregoing, Plaintiff’s motion to compel responses is denied.
It is so ordered.
Dated: January
, 2024
Hon. Jon R.
Takasugi
Judge of the
Superior Court
Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must
send an email to the court at smcdept17@lacourt.org
by 4 p.m. the day prior as directed by the instructions provided on the court
website at www.lacourt.org. If a party submits
on the tentative, the party’s email must include the case number and must
identify the party submitting on the tentative.
If all parties to a motion submit, the court will adopt this tentative
as the final order. If the department
does not receive an email indicating the parties are submitting on the
tentative and there are no appearances at the hearing, the motion may be placed
off calendar. For more information, please contact the court clerk at (213)
633-0517.