Judge: Joseph Lipner, Case: 23STCV03491, Date: 2023-12-19 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23STCV03491    Hearing Date: December 19, 2023    Dept: 72

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

DEPARTMENT 72

TENTATIVE RULING

            Plaintiff LVNV Funding, LLC (“Plaintiff”) moves to deem its Requests for Admission 1-10 served on May 1, 2023 admitted.  The Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s motion and deems Requests for Admission 1-10 admitted. 

However, this grant is contingent on Plaintiff demonstrating at the hearing that it served the requests for admission and the motion papers on Defendant Gerald Davis (“Defendant”) at the correct address.  The address reflected on Plaintiff’s proofs of service (on Tamarind Avenue) is different than the address for Defendant reflected in the Court system (on Lanewood Avenue).

Plaintiff asserts that it served Defendant at a Tamarind Avenue address on May 1, 2023.  Defendant did not serve any responses to the requests for admission.  Defendant also did not oppose Plaintiff’s motion to deem the requests for admission admitted.

When a party to whom requests for admission are directed fails to serve a timely response, the “requesting party may move for an order that . . . the truth of any matters specified in the requests be deemed admitted.”  (Civ. Proc. Code § 2033.280, subd. (b).)  “The court shall make this order, unless it finds that the party to whom the requests for admission have been directed has served, before the hearing on the motion, a proposed response to the requests for admission that is in substantial compliance with Section 2033.220.”  (Civ. Proc. Code § 2033.280, subd. (c).)

Under these principles, the Court grants Plaintiff’s motion, so long as Plaintiff can demonstrate proper service.

Plaintiff shall give notice.