Judge Lee W. Tsao, Case Number: 22NWCV00350, Date: 2023-10-12 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Lee W. Tsao, Case: 22NWCV00350, Date: 2023-10-12 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22NWCV00350 Hearing Date: October 12, 2023 Dept: C

BETANCOURT v. BETANCOURT

CASE NO.: 22NWCV00350

HEARING: 10/12/23

I. Defendant ANGEL BETANCOURT’s unopposed Motion to Compel Plaintiffs’ ENRIQUE BETANCOURT, JR. and MARIA BETANCOURT’s Initial Responses to Form Interrogatories – General (set one) is GRANTED.

II. Defendant ANGEL BETANCOURT’s unopposed Motion to Compel Plaintiffs’ ENRIQUE BETANCOURT, JR. and MARIA BETANCOURT’s Initial Responses to Special Interrogatories (set two) is GRANTED.

Moving Party to give Notice.

No Oppositions filed as of October 9, 2023.

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 has shown that Form Interrogatories (set one) were served on August 22, 2022, and that Special Interrogatories (set two) were properly served onto on October 3, 2022. The deadlines to respond have expired, and no responses of any kind have been provided. These Motions were filed May 8, 2023. As of October 9, 2023, no substantive Oppositions have been filed to the subject Motions.

Therefore, the Motions to Compel are GRANTED, and Plaintiffs ENRIQUE BETANCOURT, JR. and MARIA BETANCOURT are ORDERED to provide verified responses, without objection by no later than 15 days from date of the Court’s issuance of this Order. This date may be extended by stipulation of the parties. If any objections are asserted, it will be tantamount to no response at all and will be deemed a violation of this Court’s order.

Sanctions may be awarded against a party who fails to oppose a motion to compel. (C.R.C 3.1348(a).). Plaintiffs failed to submit any Oppositions to the instant Motions. As such, there is nothing to show that they acted with substantial justification and the Court knows of no other circumstances which would make the imposition of sanctions unjust.

Reasonable sanctions are awarded as follows: Plaintiffs ENRIQUE BETANCOURT, JR.; MARIA BETANCOURT; and their counsel of record are ORDERED to pay Defendant ANGEL BETANCOURT and their counsel of record reasonable sanctions in the total amount of $1,475.00. ($295/hr. x 5 hrs.) by no later than 30 days from the Court’s issuance of this Order. This date may be extended per agreement of the parties.