Judge: Jon R. Takasugi, Case: 24STCV00660, Date: 2024-08-02 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24STCV00660    Hearing Date: August 2, 2024    Dept: 17

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

DEPARTMENT 17

TENTATIVE RULING

Plaintiff’s motions to compel initial responses to its Form Interrogatories and Requests for Production are MOOT.

Plaintiff’s motion to have its RFAs deemed admitted is GRANTED.

Defendant is sanctioned $350.00.

            On 1/9/2024, Plaintiff Immigrant Rights Defense Council, LLC (Defendant) filed suit against Elizabeth Vartanian (Defendant), alleging a violation of the Immigration Consultant Act.

            Now, Plaintiff moves to compel initial responses to discovery from Defendant and have its Requests for Admission (RFAs) deemed admitted as to Defendant. 

Discussion

            On 1/30/2024, Plaintiff served Defendant with Form Interrogatories, Requests for Production, and Requests for Admission. As such, responses were due by 3/5/2024.

            As for the Form Interrogatories and Requests for Production, Defendant clarified that she provided amended responses on 7/3/2024. While Plaintiff contends that those responses are inadequate, such an issue is appropriately addressed through a motion to compel further, after adequate meet and confer has taken place. The Court also notes that it requires that the parties participate in an informal discovery conference (IDC) before any motion to compel further is heard on the merits.

            As for the Requests for Admission, Defendant served amended responses on 7/3/2024. However, in reply, Plaintiff indicated that the responses are based on information and belief and thus are not validly verified. (Weil & Brown, Cal Prac. Guide: Civ. Pro. Bef. Trial Ch. 8F-5 (The Rutter Group 2023), § 8:1104) (“A verification on behalf of an individual stating, ‘I am informed and believe that the matters stated herein are true’ is insufficient.”) “Unverified or unsworn responses to requests for admission [are] tantamount to no responses at all and [are] not merely incomplete responses....” (Appleton v. Superior Court (1988) 206 Cal.App.3d 632, 634.) Defendant, while pro per, must be held to the same standard as other litigants and is bound by the standards set forth in Code of Civil Procedure and Rules of Court. As such, Defendant’s improperly verified responses are tantamount to no respond at all. Defendant must provide proper responses and seek relief.

            Based on the foregoing, Plaintiff’s motions to compel initial responses to its Form Interrogatories and Requests for Production are moot. Plaintiff’s motion to have its RFAs deemed admitted is granted. Defendant is sanctioned $350.00 in connection with the motion to deemed Requests for Admission admitted.  

It is so ordered.

Dated:  August    , 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.