Judge: Jon R. Takasugi, Case: 23STCV12769, Date: 2024-11-27 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23STCV12769    Hearing Date: November 27, 2024    Dept: 17

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

DEPARTMENT 17

TENTATIVE RULING

Defendant’s motions to compel discovery are MOOT.

Plaintiff is sanctioned, jointly and severally with counsel, $1,400 per set of discovery, for a total of $5,600 payable within 30 days.

On 6/5/2023, Plaintiff Timothy Kinman (Plaintiff) filed suit against 12 distinct Defendants. On 10/26/2024, Plaintiff filed a first amended complaint (FAC) alleging: (1) violation of Civil Code section 1942.4; (2) tortious breach of the warranty of habitability; (3) private nuisance; (4) business and professions Code section 17200; (5) negligence; (6) breach of the covenant of quiet enjoyment; (7) intentional infliction of emotional distress; (8) negligence per se; (9) violation of Consumer Legal Remedies Act (CLRA); (10) toxic environmental mold tort; (11) violation of tenant anti-harassment ordinance; (12) California Welfare and Institutions Code section 15600; and (13) false advertising.

On 8/23/2024, Defendant Manhattan Loft, LLC moved to have its Requests for Admission (RFAs) deemed admitted as to Plaintiff. Defendant also moved to compel initial responses from Plaintiff to its: (1) Form Interrogatories; (2) Special Interrogatories; and (3) Requests for Production (RFPs.)

For ease, the Court has consolidated its ruling into a single analysis.

Discussion

            As a preliminary matter, Defendant consolidated its motion to compel responses to Form Interrogatories, Special Interrogatories, and RFPs. Given that each is a distinct set of discovery, Defendant must still issue three filing fees for this consolidated motion.

            As for the substance of Defendant’s motions, on 3/19/2024, Defendant served Plaintiff with the subject discovery. As such, responses were due on 4/22/2024. Defendant indicated that at the time of these motions’ filing no response to discovery had been received, and an extension to respond was not timely requested. (Wayne Decl. ¶3)

            In opposition, Plaintiff’s counsel indicated that discovery responses were served electronically on 9/2/2024.

            Given that these motions were filed on 8/23/2024, the Court still finds that Defendant’s motions were necessary to prompt Plaintiff to provided discovery responses. This is especially true given that responses were initially due in April 2024.

            Based on the foregoing, Defendant’s motions to compel discovery are moot. Plaintiff is sanctioned, jointly and severally with counsel, $1,400 per set of discovery. (350/hr x 4 hr.) 

It is so ordered.

Dated:  November    , 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.