Judge: Lee S. Arian, Case: 24STCV00370, Date: 2025-02-03 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 24STCV00370 Hearing Date: February 3, 2025 Dept: 27
SUPERIOR COURT OF
THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOR THE COUNTY OF
LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT
|
MARIA SILVA PLEITEZ, Plaintiff, vs. KWK TRUCKING, INC., Defendants. |
) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) |
[TENTATIVE RULING] MOTIONS TO COMPEL
INITIAL RESPONSES ARE DENIED. Dept. 27 1:30 p.m. February 3, 2025 |
On
June 20, 2024, Plaintiff served Form Interrogatories, Set One, and Request for
Production of Documents, Set One, on Defendant KWK Trucking, Inc. On the same
date, Plaintiff propounded Request for Production of Documents, Set One, and
Form Interrogatories, Set One, to Defendant DHL Express. Defendants’ responses
were due by July 22, 2024.
Defendants
DHL Express and KWK Trucking, Inc. are represented by the same counsel. On July
22, 2024, Defendants, through their counsel, Ms. Goldscher, served objections
to all discovery requests at issue.
Plaintiff
argues that the objections were boilerplate and meritless and moves the Court
to compel initial responses. However, because Plaintiff concedes that the
responses were timely, objections have not been waived, and a motion to compel
initial responses is procedurally improper. Plaintiff must file a motion to
compel further responses instead.
Additionally,
under Personal Injury Hub rules, a motion to compel further responses requires
the parties to attend an Informal Discovery Conference (IDC) before the motion
can be heard. No IDC has been scheduled in this matter.
Accordingly,
the motions are denied. However, the Court reviewed the responses at issue and
finds that they appear to be boilerplate in nature and orders the parties to
meet and confer on the responses by February 7, 2025.
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.
|
|
|
|
|
Hon. Lee S. Arian Judge of the Superior Court |