Judge: Kerry Bensinger, Case: 21STCV22981, Date: 2023-02-02 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV22981    Hearing Date: February 2, 2023    Dept: 27

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

 

JOSIASH WINANS,

                   Plaintiff(s),

          vs.

 

MAURICE J WILLIAMS., et al.,

 

                   Defendant(s).

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

      CASE NO.: 21STCV22981

 

[TENTATIVE] ORDER RE: DEFENDANT MAURICE J. WILLIAMS’ MOTION TO COMPEL PLAINTIFF’S FURTHER RESPONSES TO FORM INTERROGATORIES, AND REQUEST FOR MONETARY SANCTIONS

 

Dept. 27

1:30 p.m.

February 2, 2023

 

          On June 21, 2021, Plaintiff Josiah Winans filed this action against Defendants Maurice J. Williams (“Williams”), Hao Huang (“Huang”), and Lyft, Inc. (“Lyft”) for injuries arising from a motor vehicle accident, while Plaintiff was a passenger in a vehicle operated by Huang.

          On August 15, 2022, Williams (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant”) served Form Interrogatories (Set One) (the “Interrogatories”) on Plaintiff.  Plaintiff responded by serving unverified, objection only, responses.  Defendant met and conferred with Plaintiff in an attempt to have Plaintiff provide further responses, but that attempt was unsuccessful.

          On November 14, 2022, Defendant filed the instant Motion to compel Defendant to provide further responses to the Interrogatories. 

          No opposition or reply have been filed.

 

          Legal Standard — Compel Further Responses

Under Code of Civil Procedure sections 2030.300, subdivision (a), and Section 2031.310, parties may move for a further response to interrogatories or requests for production of documents where an answer to the requests are evasive or incomplete or where an objection is without merit or too general.  

Notice of the motions must be given within 45 days of service of the verified response, otherwise, the propounding party waives any right to compel a further response. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.300, subd. (c); Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.310, subd. (c).) The motions must also be accompanied by a meet and confer declaration. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.300, subd. (b); Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.310, subd. (b).)    

Finally, Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 3.1345 requires that all motions or responses involving further discovery contain a separate statement with the text of each request, the response, and a statement of factual and legal reasons for compelling further responses. (Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 3.1345, subd. (a)(3)). 

Analysis

It is unclear whether the Motion was timely made.  While in the memorandum of points and authorities Defendant represents that Plaintiff served response to the Interrogatories on September 30, 2022, that representation is not included in a declaration signed under penalty of perjury.  In addition, Defendant failed to attach Plaintiff’s responses to the Interrogatories, which would have included the date that the responses were provided, and would have provided clarity on this issue. 

If the responses were served on September 30, 2022, then the Motion is timely.

The 45-day time limit is mandatory and jurisdictional.¿¿(Sexton v. Superior Court¿(1997) 58 Cal. App. 4th 1403, 1410.)

In light of the lack of clarity as to whether the Court has jurisdiction to entertain the Motion, the Court CONTINUES the Motion to allow Defendant to supplement the Motion to show that the responses to the Interrogatories were served on September 30, 2022.

CONCLUSION

Defendant’s Motion to Compel Plaintiff’s Further Responses is CONTINUED to __________________.

Moving party to give notice.

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at SSCDEPT27@lacourt.org indicating intention to submit on the tentative as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org.  Please be advised that if you submit on the tentative and elect not to appear at the hearing, the opposing party may nevertheless appear at the hearing and argue the matter.  Unless you receive a submission from all other parties in the matter, you should assume that others might appear at the hearing to argue.  If the Court does not receive emails from the parties indicating submission on this tentative ruling and there are no appearances at the hearing, the Court may, at its discretion, adopt the tentative as the final order or place the motion off calendar.

    Dated this 2nd day of February 2023

 

 

 

 

Hon. Kerry Bensinger

Judge of the Superior Court