Judge: Lee S. Arian, Case: 21STCV39769, Date: 2024-03-26 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV39769    Hearing Date: March 26, 2024    Dept: 27

Hon. Lee S. Arian¿¿ 

Department 27¿¿ 

Tentative Ruling¿¿ 

¿ 

Hearing Date:           3/26/2024 at 1:30 p.m.¿¿ 

Case No./Name:       21STCV39769 YOUNG SONG LEE vs CHI HOON KIM 

Motion:                    MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET TWO, AND REQUEST FOR MONETARY SANCTIONS

Moving Party:           Defendant Steve Limb

Responding Party:    Unopposed 

Notice:                     Sufficient¿¿ 

Ruling:                     MOTIONS TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET TWO, AND REQUEST FOR MONETARY SANCTIONS ARE GRANTED

Legal Standard¿ 

A plaintiff may make a demand for production of documents and propound interrogatories without leave of court at any time 10 days after the service of the summons on, or appearance by, the party to whom the demand is directed, whichever occurs first. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.020, subd. (b); Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.020, subd. (b).) The demand for production of documents is not limited by number, but the request must comply with the formatting requirements in Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.030. A party may propound 35 specially prepared interrogatories that are relevant to the subject matter of the pending action and any additional number of official form interrogatories that are relevant to the subject matter of the pending action. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.030, subd. (a)(1) - (a)(2).)¿¿¿¿ 

¿¿¿ 

The party whom the request is propounded upon is required to respond within 30 days after service of a demand, but the parties are allowed to informally agree to an extension and confirm any such agreement in writing. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.260, subd. (a); Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.260, subd. (a); Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.270, subd. (a) - (b); Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.270, subd. (a) - (b).)¿¿¿¿ 

¿¿¿ 

If a party fails to timely respond to a request for production or interrogatories, the party to whom the request is directed waives any right to exercise the option to produce writings under Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.230, and waives any objection, including one based on privilege or on the protection for work product. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.300, subd. (a); Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.290, subd. (a).)¿¿The party propounding the discovery requests may move for an order compelling responses. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.300, subd. (b); Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.290, subd. (b).) Unlike a motion to compel further discovery responses, a motion to compel initial discovery responses does not have any meet and confer requirements.¿¿ 

¿¿ 

Code of Civil Procedure section 2023.030, subdivision (a) provides, in pertinent part, that the court may impose a monetary sanction on a party engaging in the misuse of the discovery process to pay the reasonable expenses, including attorney’s fees, incurred by anyone as a result of that conduct. A misuse of the discovery process includes failing to respond or submit to an authorized method of discovery. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2023.010, subd. (d).)¿¿¿A court has discretion to fix the amount of reasonable monetary sanctions. (Cornerstone Realty Advisors, LLC v. Summit Healthcare Reit, Inc. (2020) 56 Cal.App.5th 771, 791.)¿¿¿¿¿¿ 

¿¿¿¿¿ 

Analysis and Conclusion

On October 28, 2021, Plaintiff filed the present assault and battery case. On December 6, 2023, Defendant served his special interrogatories, Set Two. Responses were due on January 9, 2024; however, none were provided. After communications between the parties, Defendant granted an extension to January 26, 2024, for Plaintiff to submit the responses. Yet, Plaintiff failed to provide the discovery responses by this extended deadline. Defendant now moves the Court to Compel Plaintiff to provide a discovery response. Plaintiff did not oppose the motion, and there is no evidence to suggest that the discovery response at issue was served prior to the hearing date. Thus, Defendant's Motion to Compel is GRANTED. Plaintiff is hereby ORDERED to provide verified discovery responses without objections to Defendant’s Special Interrogatories, Set Two, within 20 days of today’s date.

Plaintiff's failure to respond forced Defendant to incur attorney's fees in filing the present motion. Defendant requests sanctions in the amount of $1,150.00. The Court finds this amount reasonable. Consequently, the Court sanctions Plaintiff in the amount of $1,150.00. Plaintiff and his counsel are ORDERED, jointly and severally, to pay sanctions of $1,150.00 to Defendant Steve Limb within 20 days of today’s date. 

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE:            

If a party intends to submit on this tentative ruling, the party must send an email to the court at sscdept27@lacourt.org with the Subject line “SUBMIT” followed by the case number.  The body of the email must include the hearing date and time, counsel’s contact information, and the identity of the party submitting.              

Unless all parties submit by email to this tentative ruling, the parties should arrange to appear remotely (encouraged) or in person for oral argument.  You should assume that others may appear at the hearing to argue.              

If the parties neither submit nor appear at hearing, the Court may take the motion off calendar or adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the Court.  After the Court has issued a tentative ruling, the Court may prohibit the withdrawal of the subject motion without leave.