Judge: Lee W. Tsao, Case: 22NWCV00447, Date: 2023-02-23 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 22NWCV00447 Hearing Date: February 23, 2023 Dept: C
YANDELL v. RANDLE
CASE
NO.: 22NWCV00447
HEARING: 02/23/23
#3
TENTATIVE ORDER
Moving
Party to give Notice.
No
Opposition filed as of February 21, 2023. Due by February 8, 2023. (CCP
§1005(b).)
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,
Plaintiff has shown that Special Interrogatories (set one) was properly served
onto Defendant GREGORY RANDLE on July 29, 2022. The deadline to respond has
expired, and no responses of any kind have been provided. Plaintiff filed this motion on November 16,
2022— approximately four months after service of the discovery. As of February 21,
2023, no Opposition has been filed to the subject Motion.
Therefore,
the Motion to Compel is GRANTED, and
Defendant GREGORY RANDLE is ORDERED
to provide verified responses, without objection by no later than 30 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.
Reasonable sanctions are awarded as
follows: Defendant GREGORY RANDLE is ORDERED to pay Plaintiff and their
counsel of record reasonable sanctions in the total amount of $460.00. ($400/hr.
x 1 hrs.) ($60 costs) no later than 30 days from the Court’s issuance of
this Order. This date may be extended per agreement of the parties.
The
Court notes that the instant Motion is captioned as Plaintiff’s Motion to
Compel Further Responses to Special Interrogatories (set one). However, as
indicated above, Defendant failed to serve any responses. Therefore, there is
nothing further to compel at this time. However, the name of a motion is not
controlling, and it is clear from the body of the Motion that Plaintiff meant
to file and schedule a Motion to Compel Initial Responses to Special
Interrogatories (set one).