Judge: Lee S. Arian, Case: 23STCV00858, Date: 2023-11-21 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23STCV00858    Hearing Date: November 22, 2023    Dept: 27

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

MOVING PARTY:            Defendant Margarito Eugenio Delgado

RESPONDING PARTY:    None

I.         BACKGROUND

On January 13, 2023, plaintiff Kimberly Boyd (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against defendants Margarito Eugenio Delgado (“Delgado”) (sued erroneously as “Wargarito Eugenio Delgado”), Deyci Fernandez, Chibueze Ezeibe, and Does 1-50, inclusive, for negligence arising out of a car accident that occurred on November 9, 2021.

On October 9, 2023, Delgado filed the instant motions to 1) compel verified responses to Form Interrogatories, Set One, and 2) compel verified responses to Special Interrogatories, Set One. Delgado also requests monetary sanctions against Plaintiff in the amount of $1,061.65 in connection with each motion (a total of $2,123.30).

As of November 20, 2023, there have been no oppositions filed in response to either motion.

II.        LEGAL STANDARD

“Within 30 days after service of interrogatories, the party to whom the interrogatories are propounded shall serve the original of the response to them on the propounding party...” (Code Civ. Proc. § 2030.260(a).) The propounding party on a set of interrogatories may agree to extend the time for service beyond that 30 days. (Code Civ. Proc. § 2030.270.) If the propounded party does not respond in the appropriate amount of time, the propounding party may move for an order to compel responses. (Code Civ. Proc. § 2030.290(b).)  A party that fails to serve a timely response to the discovery request waives any objection to the request, including one based on privilege or the protection of attorney work product. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.290(a), 2031.300(a);¿Sinaiko¿Healthcare Consulting, Inc., supra, 148 Cal.App.4th at 404.) The propounding party may move the court for orders compelling responses to interrogatories.  (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.290(b), 2031.300(b);¿Sinaiko¿Healthcare Consulting, Inc., supra, 148 Cal.App.4th at 404.)¿ 

“The court may impose a monetary sanction ordering that one engaging in the misuse of the discovery process, or any attorney advising that conduct, or both pay the reasonable expenses, including attorney’s fees, incurred by anyone as a result of that conduct.” (CCP § 2023.030(a).) Misuse of the discovery process includes: “(d) failing to respond or to submit to an authorized method of discovery.” (CCP § 2023.010(d).) Reasonable expenses under CCP section 2023.030(a) include the time spent in researching and preparing the motion, as well as court time and travel time spent in connection with the motion. (Ghanooni v. Super Shuttle (1993) 20 Cal.App.4th 256, 262.)

III.      DISCUSSION

On April 28, 2023, Delgado served Form Interrogatories, Set One, and Special Interrogatories, Set One, on Plaintiff by emailing them to their attorney of record. (Form Interrogatories Motion (“FIM”), Lane Decl., Ex. A) (Special Interrogatories Motion (“SIM”), Lane Decl., Ex. A.) Responses were due May 30, 2023. (Ibid.) However, no responses have been received to date. (Ibid.)

On June 9, 2023, Delgado’s counsel emailed Plaintiff’s counsel a meet and confer letter inquiring about the missing discovery responses but did not receive a response. (FIM, Lane Decl., Ex. B) (SIM, Lane Decl., Ex. A.)

Given that Plaintiff failed to timely provide responses to Delgado’s Form Interrogatories, Set One, and Special Interrogatories, Set One, the Court grants Delgado’s motions to compel. Plaintiff is ordered to provide responses to Delgado’s Form Interrogatories, Set One, and Special Interrogatories, Set One, without objections, within 20 days of this hearing.

On the issue of sanctions, Delgado contends that she is entitled to $1,061.65 for each motion due to Plaintiff’s misuse of the discovery process. Delgado’s counsel’s (“Counsel”) hourly rate is $250. Given that Counsel did not review an opposition or file a reply, the Court finds that Delgado is entitled to an order of 500.00 in monetary sanctions against Plaintiff for each motion, comprised of one hour to prepare this motion plus the filing fee. Therefore, Delgado is awarded $1,000 in sanctions.

IV.      CONCLUSION

          Defendant Margarito Eugenio Delgado’s Motions to Compel Verified Responses to Plaintiff’s Form Interrogatories, Set One, and Special Interrogatories, Set One, are GRANTED. Plaintiff is ordered to provide verified responses within 20 days of this order.

Additionally, Delgado’s request for sanctions is GRANTED, but in the reduced amount of $1000.00.

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’s 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 22nd day of November 2023