Judge: Jon R. Takasugi, Case: 24STCV05212, Date: 2025-01-10 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24STCV05212    Hearing Date: January 10, 2025    Dept: 17

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

DEPARTMENT 17

TENTATIVE RULING

Plaintiff’s motion to compel further responses to her Requests for Production is GRANTED IN PART, DENIED IN PART, consistent with the ruling set forth below.  In light of this ruling, the Court declines to award sanctions at this time.

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

            On 3/1/2024, Plaintiff Evangelina Munoz Vasquez (Plaintiff) filed suit against Ford Motor Company (Defendant or Ford), alleging: (1) violation of Civil Code section 1793.2, subdivision (d); (2) violation of Civil Code section 1793.2, subdivision (b); (3) violation of Civil Code section 1793.2, subdivision (A)(3); (4) breach of express written warranty; (5) breach of implied warranty of merchantability; and (6) negligent repair.

            On 7/9/2024, Plaintiff moved to compel further responses to her Requests for Production (RFPs) (Set One) and her Special Interrogatories.

Discussion

I.                   RFPs

Plaintiff argues that good cause exists to compel further responses to RFP Nos. 1-2, 4, 8, 10-12, 14-25, 27-28, 32, 46, 49-52, 57, 60-61, 69, 72.

After review, the Court agrees in part, disagrees in part.

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.

In light of this ruling, the Court declines to award sanctions at this time.

Based on the foregoing, Plaintiff’s motion to compel further is granted in part, denied in part, consistent with the ruling set forth above.  In light of this ruling, the Court declines to award sanctions at this time.

II.                Special Interrogatories

Plaintiff argues good cause exists to compel Defendant to provide further responses, and that Defendant’s boilerplate objections are unfounded and untimely.

After review, the Court agrees that Defendant’s responses are not as complete and straightforward as the information reasonably available to the responding party permits.” (CCP § 2030.220(a).)

For example, Interrogatory No. 2 asks Defendant to “Please IDENTIFY each and every written warranty, including any warranty extensions, issued by YOU for the SUBJECT VEHICLE.”

Defendant referred Plaintiff to https://www.ford.com/support/owner-manuals/, and then objected to the Interrogatory as overly broad.  Such a response is improper.

Based on the foregoing, Plaintiff’s motion to compel further is granted. Defendant is sanctioned, jointly and severally with counsel, $700.00. ($350/hr x 2 hr.)

It is so ordered.

Dated:  January    , 2025

   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.