Judge: Jon R. Takasugi, Case: 23STCV07048, Date: 2024-05-01 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23STCV07048    Hearing Date: May 1, 2024    Dept: 17

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

DEPARTMENT 17

TENTATIVE RULING

Plaintiff’s motion to compel further responses to Special Interrogatories Nos. 14, 20, and 23 is GRANTED. Defendant is sanctioned, jointly and severally with counsel, $700.00.

Plaintiff’s motion to compel further responses to RFPs is GRANTED IN PART, DENIED IN PART. As such, the Court declines to award sanctions at this time.

            On 3/30/2023, Plaintiff Daniel Eliezer Corral Pulido (Plaintiff) filed suit against BMW of North America, LLC, and Del Montell Motors, LTD dba Santa Monica BMW, alleging violations of the Song-Beverly Act.

            On 12/28/2023, Plaintiff moves to compel further responses to his Special Interrogatories (Set One) and to his Requests for Production (RFPs) (Set One).

            The motions are unopposed.

Discussion

I.                   Special Interrogatories

Plaintiff seeks to compel further responses to Special Interrogatories Nos. 14, 20, and 23:

-          SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 14: IDENTIFY all PERSONS who performed warranty repairs upon the SUBJECT VEHICLE.

-          SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 20: IDENTIFY all PERSONS who inspected or tested the SUBJECT VEHICLE during the RELEVANT PERIOD.

-          SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 43: Identify all individuals responsible for YOUR decision whether or not to repurchase or replace the Subject Vehicle.

The Court agrees that Plaintiff is entitled to know who these witnesses are in order to depose them and prepare for trial.

Based on the foregoing, Plaintiff’s motion to compel further responses to Special Interrogatories Nos. 14, 20, and 23 is granted. Defendant is sanctioned, jointly and severally with counsel, $700. ($350/hr x 2 hr.)

II.                RFPs

Plaintiffs argue that good cause exists to compel further responses to his RFP Nos. 2-4, 6, 10-12, 16- 17, 20, 22-26, 28-29, 37-39, and 41-98

After review of the relevant discovery responses, the Court finds some of Plaintiff’s requests to be overly broad in scope. For example, Plaintiff seeks all documents from 1/4/2014 to present which refer or relate to all same year, make and model vehicles as the subject vehicle which have been repurchased or replaced by Defendant, regardless of the reason for repurchase or replacement. However, the Court also finds certain objections by Defendant to be unfounded. For example, Defendant argues that customer complaints concerning vehicles other than the subject vehicle are irrelevant.

 In addition to all requested materials related to Plaintiff’s car itself:

1.      Defendant shall produce the “Warranty Policy and Procedure Manual” published by Defendant and provided to its authorized repair facilities, within the State of California, for the period of purchase to present.

2.      Defendant shall produce any internal analysis or investigation regarding defects concerning the transmission defect in vehicles for the same year, make, and model of the subject vehicle.

3.       Defendant shall produce any customer complaints relating to defects that are similar to the alleged defects claimed by plaintiff in vehicles within California for the same year, make, and model of the subject vehicle, for the period of purchase to present.

4.       Defendant shall produce all documents evidencing policies and procedures used to evaluate customer requests for repurchase pursuant to the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act, for the period of purchase to present.

5.       Technical Service Bulletins and Recall Notices for vehicles purchased in California for the same year, make and model of the subject vehicle. 

6.        All other requests for further production are DENIED.

Based on the foregoing, Plaintiff’s motion is granted in part, denied in part. As such, the Court declines to award sanctions at this time.

It is so ordered.

Dated:  May    , 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.