Judge Lee W. Tsao, Case Number: 22NWCV01774, Date: 2024-03-05 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Lee W. Tsao, Case: 22NWCV01774, Date: 2024-03-05 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22NWCV01774 Hearing Date: March 5, 2024 Dept: C

Realty Specialties, Inc. vs Sher Singh Gill, et al.

Case No.: 22NWCV01774

Hearing Date: March 5, 2024 @ 9:30 AM

Tentative Ruling

I. Defendant Sher Singh Gill’s Motion to Compel Form Interrogatories as to Plaintiff Realty Specialties, Inc. is GRANTED.

II. Defendant Sher Singh Gill’s Motion to Compel Special Interrogatories as to Plaintiff Realty Specialties, Inc. is GRANTED.

III. Defendant Sher Singh Gill’s Motion to Compel Responses for Request for Production as to Plaintiff Realty Specialties, Inc. is GRANTED.

IV. Sanctions are awarded in the total reduced amount is $2,184.50.

Defendant Gill to give notice.

Background

On December 30, 2022, Plaintiff Realty Specialties, Inc. (“Plaintiff”) filed a Complaint for breach of contract, violation of Penal Code § 496, and conversion against Defendants Sher Singh Gill (Gill) and Satvinder S. Ghotra.

On July 31, 2023, Gill served his first set of Form Interrogatories by email based on an agreement of the parties to accept service by e-mail. (Gevorkian Decl. re Form Interrogatories ¶ 4, Exhibit A; Gevorkian Decl. re Special Interrogatories ¶ 4, Exhibit A; Gevorkian Decl. re Requests for Production ¶ 4, Exhibit A.) Plaintiff was required to serve written responses by September 1, 2023. (Gevorkian Decl. re Form Interrogatories ¶ 5; Gevorkian Decl. re Special Interrogatories ¶ 5; Gevorkian Decl. re Request for Production ¶ 5.) Gill argues Plaintiff failed to serve written responses. (Gevorkian Decl. re Form Interrogatories ¶ 5; Gevorkian Decl. re Special Interrogatories ¶ 5; Gevorkian Decl. re Request for Production ¶ 5.)

As of February 27, 2024, no responses as been filed.

1. Motions to Compel Responses

Legal Standard

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

Defendant Gill contends that Plaintiff failed to serve any responses to Form Interrogatories, Special Interrogatories, or Requests for Production. (Gevorkian Decl. re Form Interrogatories ¶¶ 5-6; Gevorkian Decl. re Special Interrogatories ¶¶ 5-6; Gevorkian Decl. re Request for Production ¶¶ 5-6.)

Defendant Gill served all the discovery requests on Plaintiff on July 31, 2023. Plaintiff was required to respond by September 1, 2023, but did not do so. Plaintiff did not request any extensions and ultimately failed to provide discovery responses.

Accordingly, Defendant’s motions to compel are GRANTED. Plaintiff is ordered to respond to the request for production of documents and form and special interrogatories within 30 days, without objection, including objections based on privilege or 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.

2. Sanctions

Legal Standard

Misuse of the discovery process constituting conduct subject to sanctions include “failing to respond or to submit to an authorized method of discovery” and “failing to confer in person, by telephone, or by letter with an opposing party or attorney in a reasonable and good faith attempt to resolve informally any dispute concerning discovery.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 2023.010, subds. (d) and (i).) The court may impose a monetary sanction ordering that one engaging in the misuse of the discovery process, or any attorney advising that conduct, or both pay the reasonable expenses, including attorney's fees, incurred by anyone as a result of that conduct. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2023.030, subd. (a).) All discovery motions require a meet and confer declaration stating facts showing a reasonable and good faith attempt at an informal resolution of each issue presented by the motion. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2016.040.)

Discussion

The court is required to award monetary sanctions against Plaintiff unless Plaintiff can show it “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).) The monetary sanction shall be in the amount of “the reasonable expenses, including attorney's fees, incurred by anyone as a result of that conduct.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 2023.030.) Counsel for Defendant Gill requests three separate awards of sanctions.

1. For the Form Interrogatories:

$1,601.50 for: 1 hour preparing the motion .2 hours spent by supervising Counsel David Almaraz reviewing and editing the instant motion, an anticipated 1.5 hours analyzing the anticipated opposition and preparing a reply, and .5 hours by Counsel Almaraz attending the hearing. Counsel Gevorkian hourly rate is $450.00 and Counsel Almaraz hourly rate is $ 595.00.

2. For the Special Interrogatories:

3. For the Requests for Production:

Utilizing a lodestar approach, and in view of the totality of the circumstances including Defendant’s lack of opposition, and the similarity of the motions to each other, the Court finds that the total and reasonable amount of attorney’s fees and costs incurred for the work performed in connection with the pending motions against Defendant is $2,004.50 reflecting 3 hours incurred at $450.00 per hour and 1.1 hours at $595.00 per hour (three hours for drafting all the motions, .6 for Counsel Almaraz reviewing and editing all the videos, and a half hour for attending the hearing on the three motions). Costs consist of the $60 filing fee for each motion.