Judge Lee S. Arian, Case Number: 22STCV00320, Date: 2024-05-17 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Lee S. Arian, Case: 22STCV00320, Date: 2024-05-17 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV00320 Hearing Date: May 17, 2024 Dept: 27

Hon. Lee S. Arian, Dept 27

MOTIONS TO COMPEL INITIAL RESPONSES AND REQUESTS FOR SANCTIONS

Hearing Date: 5/17/24

CASE NO./NAME: 22STCV00320 JOSE MARISCAL vs SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON

Moving Party: Defendant Southern California Edison

Responding Party: Plaintiff

Notice: Sufficient

Ruling: MOTIONS TO COMPEL INITIAL RESPONSES AND REQUESTS FOR SANCTIONS IS GRANTED.

Legal Standard

A defendant may make a demand for production of documents and propound interrogatories without leave of court at any time. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.020, subd. (a); Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.020, subd. (a).) 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.)

Discussion

On January 4, 2022, Plaintiff filed the present Complaint against Defendant Southern California Edison. On August 25, 2023, Edison served its supplemental discovery requests on Plaintiff, including a Supplemental Request for Interrogatories and Supplemental Requests for Production of Documents. Plaintiff failed to provide any supplemental response by the statutory deadline and failed to respond to Defendant’s meet and confer attempts. Defendant now moves the Court to compel supplemental responses to interrogatories and requests for production.

Plaintiff did not provide the discovery responses at issue by the statutory deadline. Plaintiff did not file an opposition or any other document indicating that the responses were served prior to the hearing. Thus, Defendant’s motions to compel initial responses are granted. Plaintiff is ordered to provide complete responses to Defendant’s supplemental request for interrogatory and supplemental request for production without objection within 20 days of today.

Plaintiff’s non-response forced Defendant to file the present motions and incur attorneys’ fees. Defendant requests attorney fees in the amount of $540 per motion, which the Court finds reasonable. Consequently, the Court sanctions Plaintiff in the amount of $1,080. Plaintiff and his counsel are ORDERED, jointly and severally, to pay sanctions of $1,080 to Defendant 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.