Judge: Lee W. Tsao, Case: 23NWCV01415, Date: 2024-05-01 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23NWCV01415    Hearing Date: May 1, 2024    Dept: C

MIN GUAN VS. GARY MOORE TRUCKING, INC., ET AL.

CASE NO.:  23NWCV01415

HEARING: 5/1/24 @ 10:30 A.M.

#4

TENTATIVE RULING

Plaintiff Min Guan’s motion for relief from waiver of objections to defendant HS Service’s form interrogatories set one; special interrogatories, set one; and request for production of documents, set one is GRANTED.   

Moving Party to give NOTICE.

The motion is unopposed as of April 26, 2024.

Plaintiff Min Guan sues her employer Gary Moore Trucking, Inc. for assigning her to operate a large commercial truck. Plaintiff collided, causing severe injuries. Plaintiff also alleges that Gary Moore Trucking, Inc. did not pay her for her labor. In addition, Plaintiff sues JW Fulfillment, Inc., and HS Services for negligently handling the contents of the 26-foot box truck. Plaintiff also sues her employer for fraud.

Plaintiff moves the Court for an order to relieve her from waiver of objections to defendant HS Service’s form interrogatories, set one; special interrogatories, set one; and request for production of documents, set one.

If a party to whom interrogatories are directed does not timely respond, the party waives any objection to the interrogatories. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.290, subd. (a).) Similarly, if a party to whom a demand for inspection, copying, testing, or sampling does not timely respond, the party waives any objection to the interrogatories. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.300, subd. (a).) But the court may relieve that party from this waiver if the party satisfied the following conditions:

(1)  The party has subsequently served a response that is in substantial compliance with sections 2030.210, 2030.220, 2030.230, and 2030.240.

(2)  The party's failure to serve a timely response was the result of mistake, inadvertence, or excusable neglect. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.290, subd. (a); Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.300, subd. (a).)

Defendant served form interrogatories, set one; special interrogatories, set one; and requests for production of documents, set one on October 6, 2023 by electronic service. (Decl. Xu, ¶ 1, Ex. 1.) Plaintiff served verified responses to Defendant’s discovery on November 8, 2023. (Decl. Xu, ¶ 8.) Plaintiff’s counsel explains that she believed the responses were due on November 9, 2024. (Decl. Xu, ¶ 4.) Given the 30-day deadline and the addition of two court days for electronic service, they were actually due on November 7, 2023.  As such, Plaintiff’s responses were untimely.  The Court finds Plaintiff’s failure to serve timely responses was a mistake which warrants relief from waiver. 

The Court also finds the responses to substantially comply with sections 2030.210, 2030.220, 2030.230, and 2030.240.

Based on the above, the motion for relief from waiver of objections is GRANTED.