Judge: Kerry Bensinger, Case: 21STCV39859, Date: 2023-09-08 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV39859    Hearing Date: September 8, 2023    Dept: 27

Tentative Ruling

Judge Kerry Bensinger, Department 27

HEARING DATE:     September 8, 2023                             TRIAL DATE:  November 6, 2023

CASE:                         Denisse Navarro v. Chateau Park Casino Royale III, LLC, et al.

CASE NO.:                 21STCV39859

MOTIONS TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO DISCOVERY

MOVING PARTY:               Defendant Chateau Park Casino Royale III, LLC

RESPONDING PARTY:     No opposition

I.          BACKGROUND

On July 25, 2023, Defendant, Chateau Park Casino Royale III, LLC, filed these motions to compel Plaintiff, Denisse Navarro, to provide responses to Defendant’s Form Interrogatories, Set One, and Demand for Inspections of Documents, Set One.  Defendant seeks monetary sanctions against Plaintiff.

The motions are unopposed.

II.        LEGAL STANDARD 

If a party to whom interrogatories and inspection demands were directed fails to serve a timely response, the propounding party may move for an order to compel responses without objections.¿ (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.290, subd. (b), 2031.300, subd. (b).)¿ Moreover, failure to timely serve responses waives objections to the requests.¿ (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.290, subd. (a), 2031.300, subd. (a).)¿¿¿ 

Monetary Sanctions¿ 

Code of Civil Procedure section 2023.030 is a general statute authorizing the Court to impose discovery sanctions for “misuse of the discovery process,” which includes (without limitation) a variety of conduct such as: making, without substantial justification, an unmeritorious objection to discovery; making an evasive response to discovery; and unsuccessfully and without substantial justification making or opposing a motion to compel or limit discovery.¿ (Code Civ. Proc., § 2023.010.)¿¿ 

If sanctions are sought, Code of Civil Procedure section 2023.040 requires that the notice specify the identity of the person against whom sanctions are sought and the type of sanction requested, that the motion be supported in the points and authorities, and the facts be set forth in a declaration supporting the amount of any monetary sanction.¿ 

If the court finds that a party has unsuccessfully made or opposed a motion to compel responses to interrogatories or inspection demands, the court “shall impose a monetary sanction . . . 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), 2031.300, subd. (c).) ¿In the context of a motion to deem requests for admission admitted, it is mandatory that the court impose monetary sanctions on the party or attorney, or both, whose failure to serve a timely response to the request necessitated the motion.¿ (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.280, subd. (c).) 

III.       DISCUSSION 

            Defendant served Plaintiff with the at-issue discovery requests on September 15, 2022.  However, to date, Defendant has not provided responses.¿ (See Weinberger Decls.)¿ Therefore, all objections to the interrogatories and demands for inspection are waived.¿¿ 

            As Defendant properly served the discovery requests and Plaintiff failed to serve responses, the Court finds Defendant is entitled to an order directing Plaintiff to provide responses to Defendant’s Form Interrogatories and Demand for Inspection of Documents.¿

            Monetary Sanctions 

            Defendant requests sanctions against Plaintiff.  Given the Court has granted these motions, sanctions are warranted.  Accordingly, sanctions are imposed against Plaintiff in the amount of $555 representing 3 hours at defense counsel’s hourly rate.

IV.       CONCLUSION

            The motions are granted.  Plaintiff Denisse Navarro is ordered to provide verified, objection-free responses to Defendants Form Interrogatories, Set One, and Demand for Inspection of Documents, Set One.

            The request for sanctions is granted.  Plaintiff is ordered to pay sanctions in the sum of $555 to Defendant, by and through Defendant’s counsel.

            Discovery responses are to be provided and sanctions are to be paid within 20 days of this order.

            Moving party to give notice. 

Dated:   September 8, 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.