Judge: Lee S. Arian, Case: 23STCV13167, Date: 2024-09-20 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23STCV13167    Hearing Date: September 20, 2024    Dept: 27

Hon. Lee S. Arian, Dept 27¿ 

¿ 

MOTION TO DEEM ADMITTED AND REQUESTS FOR SANCTIONS

Hearing Date: 9/19/24¿¿ 

CASE NO./NAME: 23STCV13167 EDWIN ZEPEDA vs CITY OF LOS ANGELES, et al. 

Moving Party: Defendants County of Los Angeles

Responding Party: Unopposed 

Notice: Sufficient¿¿ 

Ruling: MOTION TO DEEM ADMITTED AND REQUESTS FOR SANCTIONS ARE GRANTED.

Legal Standard   

Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 2033.290 provides that “[o]n receipt of a response to requests for admissions, the party requesting admissions may move for an order compelling a further response if that party deems that either or both of the following apply: (1) An answer to a particular request is evasive or incomplete. (2) An objection to a particular request is without merit or too general.” “If a party then fails to obey an order compelling further response to requests for admission, the court may order that the matters involved in the requests be deemed admitted. In lieu of, or in addition to, this order, the court may impose a monetary sanction under Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 2023.010).” Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 2033.290 (e).

Discussion

On October 10, 2023, Defendant County of Los Angeles (“County”) served Plaintiff Edwin Zepeda with Requests for Admissions, Set One. Plaintiff responded with blanket objections to each request, providing no substantive responses. On January 9, 2024, the Court granted Plaintiff's counsel's motion to be relieved as counsel, and Plaintiff is now appearing in pro per. On April 24, 2024, the Court granted the County’s Motion to Compel Plaintiff's Further Responses to the Requests for Admission without objection and imposed monetary sanctions. Plaintiff was to serve the responses within 20 days of the notice of the ruling.

On April 30, 2024, the County served the Notice of Ruling. As of July 26, 2024, when the present motion was filed, Plaintiff had not complied with the Court’s order and had not provided further responses to the Requests for Admissions. Defendant now moves the court to deem the contents of its request for admissions admitted. Plaintiff did not file an opposition or any other document indicating that further responses substantially compliant with the Court’s order had been served. Therefore, the contents of Defendant’s Requests for Admissions, Set One, are deemed admitted.

Furthermore, the Court finds that Plaintiff did not act with substantial justification. Defendant requests sanctions in the amount of $875, which the Court finds reasonable. Sanctions in the amount of $875 are ordered against Plaintiff, to be paid to Defendant within 30 days.

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.