Judge: Kerry Bensinger, Case: 21STCV36314, Date: 2023-08-03 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV36314    Hearing Date: August 3, 2023    Dept: 27

Tentative Ruling

Judge Kerry Bensinger, Department 27

HEARING DATE:     August 3, 2023                       TRIAL DATE:  November 8, 2023

CASE:                         Alejandro Gaston Torres v. Jontai Joshua Jeter

CASE NO.:                 21STCV36314

MOTIONS TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSES TO DISCOVERY

MOVING PARTY:               Defendant Joshua Jontai Jeter

RESPONDING PARTY:     Plaintiff Alejandro Gaston Torres

On October 1, 2021, Plaintiff, Alejandro Gaston Torres, filed this action against Defendant, Jontai Joshua Jeter, arising out of injuries Plaintiff allegedly sustained when he fell off or through the roof of a carport that he was repairing at Defendant’s request.  Plaintiff filed the First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) on July 8, 2022.

On August 9, 2022, Defendant filed an Answer to the FAC and simultaneously served Plaintiff with written discovery requests.  On October 28, 2022, after Defendant provided several extensions to respond to the discovery, Plaintiff served responses by electronic service.

On December 14, 2022, Defendant filed these motions to compel Plaintiff’s further responses to Set One of Defendant’s Form Interrogatories, Special Interrogatories, and Requests for Production.  Defendant also filed a motion to deem admitted the Request for Admissions, Set One, or alternatively, to compel a further response to the admissions request.  Defendant seeks sanctions against Plaintiff and his counsel.

The parties participated in an Informal Discovery Conference on February 24, 2023.  At the IDC, the Court advised defense counsel that Defendant would have to file a separate motion in order to deem the RFAs admitted.  However, Plaintiff’s counsel represented that Plaintiff would serve verified further responses to all the RFAs in dispute. 

These motions were heard on May 2, 2023.  Based on argument at the hearing, the Court did not adopt its tentative ruling.  The parties were ordered to meet and confer regarding the “RFP” issue or a notice of withdrawal within three weeks of their meet and confer; Plaintiff was to file their response two weeks after.   

On May 30, 2023, Defendant filed supplemental briefing regarding Form Interrogatories, Special Interrogatories, and Request for Production.  Plaintiff filed an opposition, arguing that the motions are moot because Plaintiff has since provided substantially compliant supplemental responses. The discovery responses, which are verified, are attached to the opposition and indicate that they were served on July 5, 2023.  Defendant filed a reply, arguing that the supplementals responses are not code compliant and still require further response.  Based on the foregoing, the Court again continued these motions to allow the parties to meet and confer regarding the supplemental responses, served July 5, 2023.  If the discovery issues were not resolved, the Court ordered the parties to file one separate statement detailing the discovery requests at issue and explaining why a further response should or should not be compelled.

On July 28, 2023, Defendant filed a Separate Statement indicating that Plaintiff has agreed to provide verified supplemental discovery responses to the following at-issue discovery: Form Interrogatory Nos. 6.2, 6.4, 6.6, 6.7, and 8.1-8.8, Special Interrogatory No. 21, and Request for Production Nos. 9, 15, and 25.  The parties have additionally requested that the hearing for these motions be continued to the earliest available date to allow Plaintiff to provide the verified responses.

            Accordingly, the motions to compel are CONTINUED to August 14, 2023 at 1:30 p.m. in Department 27 of the Spring Street Courthouse. 

Moving party to give notice. 

Dated:   August 3, 2023                                  ___________________________________

                                                                                    Kerry Bensinger

                                                                                    Judge of the Superior Court

            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.