Judge: Lee W. Tsao, Case: 20NWLC12523, Date: 2023-08-23 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 20NWLC12523 Hearing Date: October 26, 2023 Dept: C
SOCAL LIEN
SOLUTIONS LLC v. JOS LITTLE B TRUST
CASE NO.: 20NWLC12523
HEARING: 10/26/23
#1
I.
Defendant/Cross-Complainant HEATHER DAVIS’s
Motion to Compel DANIEL LI, dba Oceanview Design’s Initial Responses to Form
Interrogatories – General (set one) is DENIED as MOOT.
II.
Defendant/Cross-Complainant HEATHER DAVIS’s
Motion to Compel Cross-Defendant DANIEL LI, dba Oceanview Design’s Initial Responses
to Request for Admissions (set one) is DENIED as MOOT.
Moving Party to give notice.
Motion to Compel Responses to Form Interrogatories
If a party to whom interrogatories are directed fails to respond at all,
the propounding party’s remedy is to seek a court order compelling answers
thereto. (CCP § 2030.290.) All that needs to be shown is that the discovery was
properly served on the opposing party, that the time to respond has expired,
and that no response of any kind has been served. The moving party is not
required to show a reasonable and good faith attempt to resolve the matter
informally before filing this motion. A motion to compel initial discovery
responses need not show good cause, meeting and conferring, or timely filing,
and need not be accompanied by a separate statement. (See Sinaiko Healthcare
Consulting, Inc. v. Pac. Healthcare Consultants (2007) 148 Cal.App.4th 390,
404.) The failure to timely respond also waives all objections.
Here, Defendant/Cross-Complainant Heather Davis (“Davis”) has shown that Form Interrogatories – General
(set one) was properly served onto Cross-Defendant Daniel Li on February 8,
2023.
In Opposition, Defendant indicates that Responses were (untimely) served
on August 11, 2023.
The Motion is DENIED as MOOT.
Sanctions
may be awarded against a party who fails to oppose a motion to compel, or
opposition to the motion was withdrawn, or the requested discovery was provided
after the motion was filed. (C.R.C 3.1348(a).). Reasonable sanctions are
awarded as indicated below:
Given
the fact that the responses were untimely served, the Court finds that
reasonable sanctions are warranted in favor of the Moving Party. Cross-Defendant
Daniel Li is ORDERED to pay Defendant/Cross-Complainant HEATHER DAVIS and their
counsel of record reasonable sanctions in the total amount of $750.00 ($375 x 2
hrs.) no later than 90 days from the Court’s issuance of this Order. This date
may be extended per agreement of the parties.
Motion to Compel Responses to Request for Admissions
“If a party to whom requests for admission are directed fails to serve a
timely response, the following rules apply: (a) The party to whom the requests
for admission are directed waives any objection to the requests…. The Court, on
motion, may relieve that party from this waiver on its determination that both
of the following conditions are satisfied: (1) The party has subsequently
served a response that is in substantial compliance with Sections 2033.210,
2033.220, and 2033.230. (2) the party’s failure to serve a timely response was
the result of mistake, inadvertence, or excusable neglect…. (c) The court shall
make this order, unless it finds that the party to whom the requests for
admission have been directed has served, before the hearing on the motion, a
proposed response to the requests for admission that is in substantial
compliance with Section 2033.220. It is mandatory that the court impose a
monetary sanction under Chapter 7…on the party or attorney, or both, whose
failure to serve a timely response to requests for admission necessitated this
motion.” (CCP §2033.280.) No prior
attempt to resolve the matter informally is required.
Here, RFAs were propounded by the Moving Party on February 8, 2023. In
Opposition, Cross-Defendant indicates that untimely responses were served on August
11, 2023. The Motion to Compel Responses to Requests for Admissions is rendered
MOOT.
Sanctions are mandatory pursuant to the terms of CCP §2033.280(c). Reasonable sanctions
are awarded in favor of the Moving Party. Cross-Defendant Daniel Li is ORDERED
to pay Defendant/Cross-Complainant HEATHER DAVIS and their counsel of record reasonable
sanctions in the total amount of $750.00 ($375 x 2 hrs.) no later than 90 days
from the Court’s issuance of this Order. This date may be extended per
agreement of the parties.