Judge: Lee S. Arian, Case: 22STCV21640, Date: 2024-07-16 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV21640    Hearing Date: July 16, 2024    Dept: 27

Hon. Lee S. Arian, Dept 27

MOTION TO COMPEL INITIAL RESPONSES TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES AND REQUESTS FOR SANCTIONS

Hearing Date: 7/16/24 

CASE NO./NAME: 23STCV21640 NEIL DEEPAK PRASAD vs JOSE SILVA LOPEZ et al.

Moving Party: Plaintiff 

Responding Party: Defendants Jose Lopez and Cordova Martir

Notice: Sufficient 

Ruling:

MOTION TO COMPEL INITIAL RESPONSES TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES IS MOOT

REQUESTS FOR SANCTIONS ARE GRANTED

On January 29, 2024, Plaintiff sent his Special Interrogatories, Set One, to Defendant Martir Cordova and Special Interrogatories, Set One, to Defendant Jose Lopez. Plaintiff gave Defendants an extension to respond by May 2, 2024. After not receiving any responses, Plaintiff then informed Defendants that he would file a motion to compel discovery responses if no responses were received by May 31, 2024. As of May 31, when the motion was filed, no responses to the discovery requests at issue had been provided.

Plaintiff filed an opposition and demonstrated that responses were served on June 11, 2024. Therefore, the present motion is moot. However, the Court finds that sanctions are appropriate under the circumstances. Plaintiff granted Defendants several extensions to respond, first by May 2, 2024, and then by May 31, 2024. Despite these extensions, no responses were provided by these deadlines.

Defendants argue that they had prepared the responses but inadvertently failed to provide them by the deadline. However, Plaintiff had notified Defendants that he would file a motion if no responses were provided by the specified date. Plaintiff cannot be faulted for following through on his stated intentions. Sanctions are imposed in part to compensate a party for the time and effort expended in filing a discovery motion. Defendants only served the discovery responses after the motion had been filed.

That said, given the simplicity of the issues and based on the communication between the parties, the Court finds it likely that Defendants would have provided the discovery responses had Plaintiff communicated this to them prior to filing the motion and therefore the Court reduces the sanctions to $1,000 for both motions. Accordingly, the Court sanctions Defendants in the amount of $1000. Defendants and their counsel are ORDERED to pay, jointly and severally, sanctions of $1000 to Plaintiff within 30 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.