Judge Lee W. Tsao, Case Number: 22NWCV00821, Date: 2024-07-02 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Lee W. Tsao, Case: 22NWCV00821, Date: 2024-07-02 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22NWCV00821 Hearing Date: July 2, 2024 Dept: C

SAVANNAH HAYNIE, et al. vs AMERICAN HONDA MOTOR CO., INC.

Case No.: 22NWCV00821

Hearing Date: July 2, 2024 @ 9:30 and 10:30 a.m.

Tentative Ruling

Plaintiff Savannah Haynie’s Motion to Compel Initiative Discovery Responses to Form Interrogatories and Request for Production is GRANTED. Defendant is ordered to provide responses, without objection, within 30 days of receiving notice of this ruling.

Sanctions are awarded in the total reasonable amount of $950.00.

Plaintiff to give notice.

Background

This is a lemon law action, where Plaintiff Savannah Haynie (“Plaintiff”) has filed suit against Defendant American Honda Motor Co., Inc. (“Defendant”) alleging violations of the Song-Beverly Act.

On February 15, 2023, Plaintiffs propounded their Form Interrogatories and Request for Production on Defendant. (Lupinek Decl., ¶ 2; Exh. A.) Written responses to these requests were initially due on or before March 20, 2023. (Lupinek Decl., ¶ 3.) 4. On February 21, 2023, Defendant’s Motion to Compel Arbitration and Stay Proceedings was granted. (Lupinek Decl., ¶ 4) However, on June 14, 2023, Plaintiffs’ Motion for Reconsideration was granted, and the previous stay was lifted. (Id.)

On October 3, 2023 Plaintiffs’ office emailed Defendant to inform Defendant they had not produced their discovery responses for this case and requested Defendant provide substantive verified responses within 30 days of their letter. (Lupinek Decl., ¶ 5; Exh. B) Having not received a response to their letter, on October 9, 2023 Plaintiffs’ office emailed Defendant to inquire if they would be providing substantive discovery responses. (Lupinek Decl., ¶ 6; Exh. C.) Defendant responded and agreed to provide substantive responses by October 20, 2023. (Id.)

However, Plaintiff contends no additional discovery has been provided as of the filing of the motion.

As of June 28, 2024, the two motions are unopposed.

Legal Standard

A. Motions to Compel Responses.

A party may make a demand for production of documents and propound interrogatories without leave of court at any time 10 days after the service of the summons on, or appearance by, the party to whom the demand is directed, whichever occurs first. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.020, subd. (b); Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.020, subd. (b).) The demand for production of documents is not limited by number, but the request must comply with the formatting requirements in Code of Civil Procedure section 2031.030. A party may propound 35 specially prepared interrogatories that are relevant to the subject matter of the pending action and any additional number of official form interrogatories that are relevant to the subject matter of the pending action. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.030, subd. (a)(1) - (a)(2).)

The party whom the request is propounded upon is required to respond within 30 days after service of a demand, but the parties are allowed to informally agree to an extension and confirm any such agreement in writing. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.060, subd. (a); Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.060, subd. (a); Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.070, subd. (a) - (b); Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.070, subd. (a) - (b).)

If a party fails to timely respond to a request for production or interrogatories, the party to whom the request is directed waives any right to exercise the option to produce writings under Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.230, and waives any objection, including one based on privilege or on the protection for work product. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.300, subd. (a); Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.290, subd. (a).)

The party who propounded the discovery request may bring a motion to compel and the court shall impose a monetary sanction against any party, person, or attorney who unsuccessfully makes or opposes a motion to compel a response to a demand for production of documents or interrogatories, unless the court finds that the one subject to the sanction acted with substantial justification or that other circumstances make the imposition of the sanction unjust. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.300, subd. (c); Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.290, subd. (c).)

Discussion

A. ‘Motions to Compel Responses.

Defendant had 30 days to respond but did not do so.

Upon review of the separate motions submitted, the documents for the two motions are identical in substance. Each contains the same factual allegations and legal support.

Because Defendant has failed to respond to the discovery requests, Defendant is compelled to respond to the request for production of documents and form interrogatories, without objection, including objections based on privilege or on the protection for work product. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.300 subd. (a); Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.290, subd. (a).) For the interrogatories, the failure to respond also waives any right to exercise the option to produce writings under Code of Civil Procedure section 2030.230.

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Initial Discovery is GRANTED.

Sanctions

Legal Standard

Discussion

Plaintiff requests sanctions in the amount of $1,097.50 (30 minutes preparing the motion, as well as, two hours reviewing the opposition and drafting a reply and appearing at the hearing at a rate of $415 per hour) for each motion brought before the Court.

However, given the lack of an opposition the Court finds the reasonable amount of sanctions connected with each motion is $415 (a half hour preparing the motion and another half hour to appear at the hearing), plus reimbursement of the $60.00 filing fees, for a total of $950.00 in sanctions.