Judge Lee W. Tsao, Case Number: 23NWCV01421, Date: 2024-01-04 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Lee W. Tsao, Case: 23NWCV01421, Date: 2024-01-04 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23NWCV01421 Hearing Date: January 4, 2024 Dept: C

LANDEROS v. RAMIREZ

CASE NO.: 23NWCV01421

HEARING: 01/04/24

I. Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Responses to Form Interrogatories (set one) is DENIED as MOOT.

II. Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Responses to Special Interrogatories (set one) is DENIED as MOOT.

III. Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Responses to Request for Production of Documents (set one) is DENIED as MOOT.

IV. Plaintiff’s Motion to Deem RFA’s (set one) Admitted is DENIED as MOOT.

Moving Party to give notice.

Motion to Compel Responses to Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents

If a party to whom interrogatories and document demands are directed fails to respond at all, the propounding party’s remedy is to seek a court order compelling answers thereto. (CCP §§ 2030.290, 2031.300.) 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 Form Interrogatories (set one), Special Interrogatories (set one), and Request for Production of Documents (set one) were served on May 26, 2023.

In Opposition, Defendant indicates that Responses were (untimely) served on October 19, 2023.

The Motion is DENIED as MOOT.

Sanctions may be awarded against a party who fails to oppose a motion to compel, or opposition to the motion was withdrawn, or the requested discovery was provided after the motion was filed. (C.R.C 3.1348(a).). Reasonable sanctions are awarded as indicated below:

Given the fact that the responses were untimely served, the Court finds that reasonable sanctions are warranted in favor of the Moving Party. Defendant EDIS RAMIREZ and his counsel of record are ORDERED to pay Plaintiff and their counsel of record reasonable sanctions in the total amount of $1,184.95 ($250 x 4 hrs.) ($61.65 x 3) no later than 90 days from the Court’s issuance of this Order. This date may be extended per agreement of the parties.

Motion to Deem Admitted

“If a party to whom requests for admission are directed fails to serve a timely response, the following rules apply: (a) The party to whom the requests for admission are directed waives any objection to the requests…. The Court, on motion, may relieve that party from this waiver on its determination that both of the following conditions are satisfied: (1) The party has subsequently served a response that is in substantial compliance with Sections 2033.210, 2033.220, and 2033.230. (2) the party’s failure to serve a timely response was the result of mistake, inadvertence, or excusable neglect…. (c) The court shall make this order, unless it finds that the party to whom the requests for admission have been directed has served, before the hearing on the motion, a proposed response to the requests for admission that is in substantial compliance with Section 2033.220. It is mandatory that the court impose a monetary sanction under Chapter 7…on the party or attorney, or both, whose failure to serve a timely response to requests for admission necessitated this motion.” (CCP §2033.280.) No prior attempt to resolve the matter informally is required.

Here, RFAs were propounded by the Moving Party on May 26, 2023. In Opposition, Defendant indicates that untimely responses were served on October 19, 2023. The Motion is rendered MOOT.

Sanctions are mandatory pursuant to the terms of CCP §2033.280(c). Reasonable sanctions are awarded in favor of the Moving Party. Defendant EDIS RAMIREZ and his counsel of record are ORDERED to pay Plaintiff and their counsel of record reasonable sanctions in the total amount of $311.65 ($250 x 1 hrs.) ($61.65 x 1) no later than 90 days from the Court’s issuance of this Order. This date may be extended per agreement of the parties.