Judge: Lee W. Tsao, Case: 21NWCV00477, Date: 2023-05-16 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21NWCV00477    Hearing Date: May 16, 2023    Dept: C

JAUREGUI v. CHAVEZ

CASE NO.:  21NWCV00477

HEARING: 5/16/23 @ 10:30 AM

#6

TENTATIVE ORDER

I.             Plaintiff Jauregui’s unopposed motion to deem facts admitted and request for sanctions against Defendant Jorge Chavez is GRANTED.

II.            Plaintiff Jauregui’s unopposed motion to deem facts admitted and request for sanctions against Defendant Luz Chavez is GRANTED.

The truth of the matters in the requests for admissions is deemed admitted.  Sanctions are imposed against Defendant Jorge Chavez and counsel, jointly and severally, in the reasonable sum of $268.50.00, payable within 30 days.  Sanctions are also imposed against Defendant Luz Chavez and counsel, jointly and severally, in the reasonable sum of $268.50, payable within 30 days.

Moving Party to give NOTICE.

Plaintiff Jauregui moves to deem matters admitted pursuant to CCP § 2033.280. 

This is a fraudulent transfer case.  On or about January 18, 2013, a judgment was obtained in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendant Jorge Chavez in the amount of $93,504.00, in the Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. BC 479828.  (FAC, ¶ 7.)  On or about August 11, 2017, Defendant Jorge Chavez transferred the Property by recorded Grant Deed as follows: “Jorge Chavez, a Married Man who acquired title as a Single Man here GRANT(S) to Luz Chavez, a Married Woman as Her Sole and separate Property and Jasmin Chavez a Single Woman as Joint Tenants.”  (Id., ¶ 10.)  Plaintiff discovered the fraudulent transfer on February 9, 2021.  The FAC asserts causes of action for:

1.      Fraudulent Transfer

2.      Conspiracy

3.      Conspiracy

CCP § 2033.280(b) and (c) allow the propounding party to file a motion requesting that the truth of any matters specified in the request for admissions be deemed admitted unless the party to whom the requests have been directed has served before the hearing a proposed response that is in substantial compliance.

Plaintiff served requests for admissions on March 3, 2023.  (Maher Decl., ¶¶ 2-4, Ex. 1.)  Defendant failed to serve timely responses.  (Id., ¶¶ 5-6.)  

The court is not in receipt of any Opposition.  However, the Reply indicates that defense counsel emailed copies of the responses, which indicates that the responses were mail served on March 31, 2023, but plaintiff never received any paper copies.  (Reply, 2:10-13.) 

As there is no opposition or response to the Reply, it is unclear if Defendants properly served responses in substantial compliance to the requests for admissions.

Accordingly, the motions are GRANTED.  The truth of the matters in the requests for admissions is deemed admitted. 

Sanctions:  CCP §§ 2023.010(d) and 2031.300(c) authorize the court to impose sanctions for failure to respond to discovery without substantial justification.   CCP § 2033.280 makes the imposition of sanctions mandatory if a party fails to serve a timely response to requests for admission.

Here, sanctions are warranted because Defendants failed to demonstrate that they timely and properly respond to request for admissions. The court finds Plaintiff’s request of $268.50 against each Defendant is reasonable.  Accordingly, sanctions are imposed against Defendant Jorge Chavez and counsel, jointly and severally, in the reasonable sum of $268.50.00, payable within 30 days.  Sanctions are also imposed against Defendant Luz Chavez and counsel, jointly and severally, in the reasonable sum of $268.50, payable within 30 days.