Judge Katherine Chilton, Case 22STLC00575 2022-08-18 Tentative Ruling

PROCEEDINGS: MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO SPECIAL AND FORM INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE, AND REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION, SET ONE

Defendant Ted Wass’s Motion to Compel Plaintiff Alisa Amar’s Responses to Form Interrogatories (Set One), Special Interrogatories (Set One), and Requests for Production (Set One) is DENIED without prejudice.

Defendant Ted Wass’s Motion to Deem Requests for Admission (Set One), propounded on Plaintiff Alisa Amar, Admitted, is GRANTED. Defendant’s Request for Sanctions is GRANTED in the amount of $410.00.

On January 27, 2022, Plaintiffs Avi Amar (“Avi”) and Alisa Amar (“Alisa”) (collectively “Plaintiffs”) filed an action against Defendant Ted Wass (“Defendant”) arising out of a motor vehicle accident between Plaintiffs, on one hand, and Defendant, on the other hand, which allegedly took place on January 7, 2022.

On May 11, Defendant filed an Answer, as well as a Cross-Complaint against Moes 1 through 25 for (1) breach of written contract, (2) express indemnity, (3) total equitable indemnity, (4) partial equitable indemnity, (5) contribution and repayment, (6) declaratory relief, and (7) negligence.

On June 29, 2022, Defendant filed the following instant Motions as to Plaintiff Alisa Amar:

(1) Motion[1] to Compel Responses to Form Interrogatories (Set One), Special Interrogatories (Set One), and Requests for Production (Set One) (“MTC”); and

(2) Motion to Deem Requests for Admission (Set One), Admitted (“Motion RFAs”).

On August 11, 2022, Defendant filed a Notice of Non-Opposition, stating that Plaintiff Alisa had not filed any oppositions to the instant Motions.

A party must respond to interrogatories within 30 days after service. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.260(a).) If a party to whom interrogatories are directed does not provide timely responses, the requesting party may move for an order compelling response to the discovery. (Code Civ. Proc. § 2030.290(b).) Once compelled to respond, the party waives the right to make any objections, including ones based on privilege or work-product protection. (Code Civ. Proc. § 2030.290(a).) There is no time limit for a motion to compel responses to interrogatories other than the cut-off on hearing discovery motions 15 days before trial. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2024.020(a), 2030.290.) No meet and confer efforts are required before filing a motion to compel responses to the discovery. (See Code Civ. Proc. § 2030.290; Sinaiko Healthcare Consulting, Inc. v. Pacific Healthcare Consultants (2007) 148 Cal.App.4th 390, 411.)

A party must respond to requests for production of documents within 30 days after service. (Code Civ. Proc. § 2031.260(a).) If a party to whom requests for production of documents is directed does not provide timely responses, the requesting party may move for an order compelling response to the discovery. (Code Civ. Proc. § 2031.300(c).) The party also waives the right to make any objections, including ones based on privilege or work-product protection. (Code Civ. Proc. § 2031.300(a).) There is no time limit for a motion to compel responses to production of documents other than the cut-off on hearing discovery motions 15 days before trial. (Code Civ. Proc. §§ 2024.020(a), 2031.300.) No meet and confer efforts are required before filing a motion to compel responses to the discovery. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.300; Sinaiko Healthcare Consulting, Inc. v. Pacific Healthcare Consultants (2007) 148 Cal.App.4th 390, 411.)

First, the Court notes that Defendant has not filed the actual Notice of Motion and Motion with the Court. Hearing on the Motion appears on the Court’s calendar and the Court has received the Exhibits, Proposed Order, Proof of Service, and Notice of Non-Opposition to the Motion; however, the Notice and Motion papers have not been filed. Even if the Court provides Defendant with additional time to file these documents, the Proposed Order and other documents indicate that Defendant impermissibly seeks to pursue three separate requests for relief as a single motion. Combining discovery motions allows the moving party to avoid paying the requisite filing fees. Filing fees are jurisdictional and it is mandatory for court clerks to demand and receive them. (See Duran v. St. Luke's Hospital (2003) 114 Cal. App. 4th 457,460; Govt. Code § 70617(a).) Therefore, the Court will not accept a single Motion to Compel Plaintiff Alisa’s Amar’s Responses to Form Interrogatories (Set One), Special Interrogatories (Set One), and Requests for Production (Set One).

The Court also suggests that in filing future Motions, Defendant file all documents pertaining to a motion in a single document in order to avoid confusion regarding which documents are associated with which motion, particularly when several motions are filed at once. Additionally, Defendant should file the “Notice of Lodgment” in declaration form in support of each motion.

For these reasons, the Motion to Compel Plaintiff Alisa Amar’s Responses to Form Interrogatories, Special Interrogatories, and Requests for Production (Set One) is DENIED without prejudice.

Under Code of Civil Procedure 2033.280(b), failure to respond to requests for admission in a timely manner allows the requesting party to “move for an order that…the truth of any matters specified in the requests be deemed admitted” by the party that failed to respond. The requesting party’s motion must be granted by the court, “unless [the court] 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.” (Code Civ. Proc. § 2033.280(c)).

On April 21, 2022, Defendant served Plaintiff Alisa with Requests for Admission, Set One. (Mot. – Alisa: RFA - Sandler Decl. ¶ 2; Ex. F.) Responses were due on May 27, 2022. (Ibid. at ¶ 3.) On June 6, 2022, defense counsel sent a letter to Plaintiff’s counsel requesting responses to be served by June 15, 2022. (Ibid. at ¶ 4; Ex. D.) Defense counsel once again reached out to Plaintiff’s attorney on June 20, 2022, requesting responses to be served by June 27, 2022. (Ibid. at ¶ 5; Ex. E.) As of the date of the Motion, Defendant has not received any responses from Plaintiff Alisa to the Requests for Admission. (Ibid. at ¶ 6.)

The Court finds that Defendant has demonstrated that he served Plaintiff with Requests for Admission and did not receive any responses. Thus, Defendant’s Motion to Deem Requests for Admission, Set One, Admitted, as to Plaintiff Alisa Amar, is GRANTED.

Code of Civil Procedure § 2023.030(a) provides, in pertinent part, that the court may impose a monetary sanction on a party engaging in the misuse of the discovery process to pay the reasonable expenses, including attorney’s fees, incurred by anyone because of that conduct. Misuse of discovery includes “failing to respond or submit to an authorized method of discovery.” (Code Civ. Proc. § 2023.010(d)).

Furthermore, courts are obligated to impose monetary sanctions in cases where a “failure to serve a timely response to requests for admission necessitated this motion.” (Ibid.) Sanctions are calculated based on “reasonable expenses, including attorney’s fees, incurred by anyone as a result of that conduct.” (Ibid. § 2023.030(a)).

Defendant requests $585.00 in sanctions for Motion to Deem Requests for Admission (Set One) Admitted, as follows: two (2) hours in preparing the Motion at a rate of $175 per hour, one (1) hour to attend the hearing on the motion, and $60.00 for filing fees. (Mot. – Alisa: RFA, Sandler Decl. at ¶¶ 7-8.)

Given that the Defendant’s Motion to Deem Requests for Admission Admitted is granted, sanctions are mandatory. The Court finds $585.00 in sanctions to be excessive, and awards sanctions as follows: one (1) hour in preparing the Motion, one (1) hour to appear at the hearing, and $60.00 in filing fees, for a total amount of $410.00.

[1] The Court notes that the Defendant has filed Exhibits, Proposed Order, Proof of Service, and Notice of Non-Opposition for the instant Motion, but has failed to file the Notice and Motion papers.