Judge: Lee S. Arian, Case: 2OSTCV11485, Date: 2023-11-22 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 2OSTCV11485    Hearing Date: November 22, 2023    Dept: 27

 

 

 

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

 

KELLY DUANGRUDEESWAT,

                   Plaintiff(s),

          vs.

 

LONG BEACH TRANSIT, et al.,

 

                   Defendant(s).

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

      CASE NO.: 20stcv11485

 

[TENTATIVE] ORDER RE: PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSES SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES AND REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION; REQUEST FOR MONETARY SANCTIONS

 

Dept. 27

1:30 p.m.

November 22, 2023

 

          On March 23, 2020, Plaintiff Kelly Duangrudeeswat (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Defendants Long Beach Public Transportation Company (“Defendant”) (erroneously sued as “Long Beach Transit”) and Rodney Jones for injuries arising from an automobile accident that occurred on October 7, 2019.

          On March 31, 2023, Plaintiff served Special Interrogatories, Set One and Requests for Production, Set Two. (Mot. Compel SPROGS, Exhib. A.; Mot. Compel RPDs, Exhib. A.) Defendants served responses on October 4, 2023 after being granted multiple extensions. (Mot. Compel SPROGS, Ortega Decl. ¶ 7; Mot. Compel RPDs, Ortega Decl. ¶ 7.) Plaintiff’s counsel sent a letter on October 4, 2023, indicating that the discovery responses were insufficient and seeking to meet and confer. (Id. ¶ 9; Id. ¶ 9.) On October 13, 2023, Defendants refused to provide further responses on the grounds that 1) the responses were “identical or substantially” similar to the responses of the defendant bus driver and 2) the responses were sent via the postal service and the time limit for a Motion to Compel had expired. (Id. ¶ 11, Exhib. D.; Id. ¶ 11, Exhib. D.)

The motion compelling further responses shall include a¿meet and confer¿declaration pursuant to Section¿2016.040. (Code Civ. Proc. §§ 2030.300(b), 2031.310(b).)¿In addition, this Court requires parties to attend an IDC in advance of any hearing for a motion to compel further. 

While Plaintiff has complied with the meet and confer requirement, it has not yet participated in an IDC with the Court.

Therefore, the Court CONTINUES the hearing to XXX to allow Plaintiff to comply with the IDC requirements of the Eighth Amended Standing Order Governing Procedures in the Personal Injury Hub, section 9(E).

Dated this 22nd Day of November

 

 

 

 

Hon. Lee S. Arian

Judge of the Superior Court