Judge: Kerry Bensinger, Case: 22STCV02128, Date: 2023-08-30 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV02128    Hearing Date: August 30, 2023    Dept: 27

Tentative Ruling

Judge Kerry Bensinger, Department 27

HEARING DATE:     August 30, 2023                                 TRIAL DATE:  N/A

CASE:                                Steadfast Insurance Company v. Sandy Brown

CASE NO.:                 22STCV02128

MOTIONS TO COMPEL DISCOVERY RESPONSES

MOVING PARTY:               Plaintiff Steadfast Insurance Company

RESPONDING PARTY:     No opposition

I.          BACKGROUND

            On January 19, 2022, Petitioner,¿Steadfast Insurance Company, filed this petition for the Court to assign a case number in an underinsured motorist arbitration with Respondent, Sandy Brown, for the purpose of compelling Respondent’s responses to discovery.  The matter arises from a motor vehicle accident between Respondent and an unknown hit-and-run driver.  Subsequently, Respondent made an uninsured motor claim against Petitioner for her alleged personal injury claims.  The claim has proceeded primarily in arbitration.

            Discovery Requests and Motions to Compel

            On June 30, 2021, Petitioner served Respondent with Judicial Council Interrogatories, Special Interrogatories, Request for Production of Documents, and Request for Admissions.  On January 25, 2023, having received no responses to the foregoing discovery, Petitioner filed these motions to compel Respondent’s responses.  Petitioner does not request monetary sanctions against Respondent in their notices of motion.[1]

The motions are unopposed.

The motions were heard on July 12, 2023.  The Court issued a tentative ruling denying the motions for lack of proof of service and because trial was only 7 days away.  Counsel for Petitioner requested to be heard.  Based on oral argument, the Court continued the hearings.

On August 8, 2023, Petitioner filed a supplemental brief to address the proof of service issue.  Additionally, Petitioner clarified that the case has been proceeding as binding arbitration.  As such, a trial date is not necessary in this matter.  The trial date has since been vacated.

As a threshold matter, the Court notes Petitioner seeks to compel Respondent’s responses to the Request for Admissions.  There is no such motion.  Accordingly, the Court construes this motion as a motion to deem the Request for Admissions admitted against Respondent.

II.        LEGAL STANDARD TO COMPEL DISCOVERY RESPONSES

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).)¿ If a party to whom requests for admission are directed fails to serve a timely response, the propounding party may move for an order that the truth of the matters specified in the requests be deemed admitted (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.280, subd. (b).)¿ Moreover, failure to timely serve responses waives objections to the requests.¿ (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2033.280, subd. (a), 2030.290, subd. (a), 2031.300, subd. (a).)¿¿¿Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, any party shall be entitled as a matter of right to complete discovery proceedings on or before the 30th day, and to have motions concerning discovery heard on or before the 15th day, before the date initially set for the trial of the action.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 2024.020.)

III.       DISCUSSION

Petitioner served Respondent with the at-issue discovery requests on June 30, 2021.  To date, Respondent has not requested an extension or provided responses.  (See Yelda Decls.)  Therefore, all objections to the interrogatories and production demands are waived.¿¿ 

As Petitioner properly served the discovery requests and Respondent failed to serve responses, the Court finds Petitioner is entitled to an order directing Respondent to provide responses to Petitioner’s Judicial Council Interrogatories, Special Interrogatories, Request for Production of Documents.  In addition, Plaintiff is entitled to an order deeming admitted Request for Admissions against Respondent.¿

IV.       CONCLUSION

Accordingly, the motions are granted.  Respondent, Sandy Brown, is ordered to provide verified, objection-free responses to Petitioner’s Judicial Council Interrogatories, Special Interrogatories, and Request for Production of Documents within 20 days of this order.¿ Petitioner’s Request for Admissions are deemed admitted against Respondent. 

Moving party to give notice, unless waived. 

Dated:   August 30, 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.