Judge: Lee S. Arian, Case: 20STCV37039, Date: 2023-11-28 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 20STCV37039    Hearing Date: November 28, 2023    Dept: 27

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

          Background

On September 28, 2020, plaintiff Christina Marie Aguero-Butler (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against defendant Arjang Naim, M.D. (“Naim”) and DOES 1-100 (collectively “Defendants”) for injuries allegedly arising from a bilateral tubal ligation procedure occurring on October 12, 2018.

On March 24, 2023, Defendant Naim served Plaintiff with his first set of discovery requests, which included form and special interrogatories and requests for production. Plaintiff provided her initial responses to this discovery on July 11, 2023.

On July 25, 2023, Defendant Naim sent meet and confer correspondence to Plaintiff with respect to her responses to Form Interrogatory No. 2.6, Special Interrogatories No. 1, No. 5, No. 6, No. 7, No. 8 and Request for Production No. 4.

 On August 22, 2023, Plaintiff provided supplemental responses to these discovery requests.

On September 13, 2023, Defendant Naim sent his second meet and confer to Plaintiff with respect to Plaintiff’s responses to Form Interrogatory 2.6, Special Interrogatories No .1, No. 8 and Request for Production No. 4.

On September 19, 2023, Plaintiff requested a two-week extension to provide supplemental responses as Plaintiff was still recovering from an August 31, 2023, surgery. Defendant Naim did not grant the extension based on what he perceived as bad faith conduct by Plaintiff after he had previously granted an extension to respond.

On October 4, 2023, Defendant Naim conducted Plaintiff’s deposition. At that time, Plaintiff agreed to review all produced records and informally produce relevant records not yet produced.

On October 9, 2023, Defendant Naim filed the instant motions to compel further responses from Plaintiff for Form Interrogatory No. 2.6, Special Interrogatory No. 1, Special Interrogatory No. 8 and Request for Production 4.

Defendant Naim did not seek an Informal Discovery Conference prior to filing these motions.

On October 27, 2023, Plaintiff provided supplemental responses and asked Defendant to withdraw his motion. Defendant denied the request to withdraw the motion.

Defendant Naim’s Motions are Procedurally Deficient 

Pursuant to Section 9, subdivision E of the Eighth Amended Standing Order for Procedures in the Personal Injury Hub Courts for the County of Los Angeles, Central District (“Eighth Amended Hub Order”), Personal Injury (“PI”) Hub Courts will not hear Motions to Compel Further Discovery Responses to Discovery until the parties have engaged in an Informal Discovery Conference (IDC).  PI Hub Courts may deny or continue a Motion to Compel Further Responses to Discovery if parties fail to schedule and complete an IDC before the scheduled hearing on a Motion to Compel Further Responses to Discovery.  Here, the parties have not scheduled or completed an IDC prior to the hearing for these motions.  

The Eighth Amended Hub Order further provides:  “After meeting and conferring about available dates for an IDC, the moving/propounding party shall reserve an IDC through [the Court Reservation System (“CRS”)] and provide notice of the reserved IDC to the opposing/responding party by filing and serving an Informal Discovery Conference Form for Personal Injury Courts (LASC CIV 239) at least 15 court days before the IDC and attach the CRS reservation receipt as the last page.  The IDC will not be “scheduled” by the court until the IDC Form is filed.  The opposing/responding party may file and serve a responsive IDC Form at least 10 court days before the IDC.  All parties shall briefly set forth their respective positions on the pending discovery issues on the IDC Form. “

Given that the parties have not even begun the process required by the Eighth Amended Hub Order, the Court denies the Motions without prejudice.

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 28th day of November 2023