Judge: Joseph Lipner, Case: 19STCV12193, Date: 2023-08-15 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 19STCV12193    Hearing Date: August 15, 2023    Dept: 72

Date:               8/15/23                                               

Case No.:        19STCV12193                                                           

Case Name:     Guzman v. Moreno

Plaintiff Gabriel Guzman seeks an order compelling responses from Defendant Gloria Moreno to Plaintiff’s Form Interrogatories – General (Set No. One).  Plaintiff also seeks sanctions of $875.  Defendant has not opposed the motion.

The Court GRANTS plaintiff’s motion in its entirety.  Defendant Gloria Moreno is ordered to serve responses to Plaintiff’s Form Interrogatories – General (Set No. One), without objections, within 30 days of this ruling.       Defendant is further ordered to pay Plaintiff sanctions of $875 within 30 days of this ruling.  Plaintiff shall give notice of this ruling and file proof of service of the notice.

The issues on this unopposed motion are straightforward.  “Within 30 days after service” of interrogatories, the responding party shall serve responses to the discovery “unless on motion” of the propounding party, the court has shortened the time for response, or “on motion” of the responding party, the court has extended the time for response. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.260, subd. (a).)

“If a party to whom interrogatories are directed fails to serve a timely response…[t]he party to whom the interrogatories are directed waives any right to exercise the option to produce writings under Section 2030.230, as well as any objection to the interrogatories, including one based on privilege or the protection for work product[.]” (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.290, subd. (a).)

“The court shall impose a monetary sanction under Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 2023.010) against any party, person, or attorney who unsuccessfully makes or opposes a motion to compel a response to interrogatories, unless it finds that the one subject to the sanction acted with substantial justification or that other circumstances make the imposition of the sanction unjust.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.290, subd. (c).)

On or about October 7, 2019, Plaintiff served Form Interrogatories – General on Defendant via Certified Mail, and the responses were due by November 11, 2019. (Motion, declaration of Varand Vartanian (“Vartanian Decl.”), ¶¶ 12-14; Exhibit 1 – a copy of the interrogatories.) However, as of the date counsel signed his declaration on May 5, 2023, Plaintiff has yet to receive Defendant’s responses. (Vartanian Decl., ¶ 14.)

            The Court finds it proper to grant the request to compel Defendant’s responses to Plaintiff’s Form Interrogatories – General (Set No. One) based on Plaintiff’s counsel’s declaration and Defendant’s failure to file an opposition.