Judge: Lisa R. Jaskol, Case: 21STCV18585, Date: 2024-12-30 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 21STCV18585 Hearing Date: December 30, 2024 Dept: 28
Having considered the moving papers, the Court rules as follows.
BACKGROUND
On May 18, 2021, Plaintiff Rose Martinez (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Defendant Forever Caring and Does 1-50 for general negligence.
On October 19, 2021, Defendant Graceful Senescence Adult Day dba Forever Caring Adult Day Health Care (“Defendant”) filed an answer.
On November 17, 2021, Defendant filed a notice of errata stating its correct name is Graceful Senescence Adult Day Health Care, Inc. dba Forever Caring Adult Day Health Care.
On March 5, 2024, the Court granted Freddie Haffner’s request to be appointed successor-in-interest to Plaintiff, who passed away in 2022. The Court relieved Plaintiff’s former counsel.
On November 12, 2024, Defendant filed a motion to deem admitted matters specified in requests for admission. The motion was set for hearing on December 30, 2024. On December 20, 2024, Defendant filed a notice of non-opposition.
Trial is currently scheduled for June 30, 2025.
PARTY’S REQUESTS
Defendant asks the Court to deem admitted the truth of matters specified in requests for admission, set one, served on Plaintiff’s successor-in-interest Freddie Haffner (“Haffner”) and impose sanctions on Haffner.
LEGAL STANDARD
Code of Civil Procedure section 2033.280 provides:
“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, including one based on privilege or on the protection for work product under Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 2018.010). 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.
“(b) The requesting party may move for an order that the genuineness of any documents and the truth of any matters specified in the requests be deemed admitted, as well as for a monetary sanction under Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 2023.010).
“(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 (commencing with Section 2023.010) on the party or attorney, or both, whose failure to serve a timely response to requests for admission necessitated this motion.”
(Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.280.)
DISCUSSION
On September 17, 2024, Defendant served requests for admission, set one, on Haffner, who is representing himself. The requests asked Haffner to admit the following:
“1. Admit that [Defendant] did not owe YOU (as used herein, ‘YOU’ and ‘YOUR’ shall mean Plaintiff, ROSE MARTINEZ and anyone acting on her behalf) a legal duty of care after YOU were driven home.
“2. Admit that [Defendant] did not owe you a legal duty of care.
“3. Admit that [Defendant] did not breach a legal duty of care after YOU were driven home to YOUR usual location.
“4. Admit that [Defendant] did not breach a legal duty of care.
“5. Admit that [Defendant] did not cause YOU any harm.
“6. Admit that YOU did not suffer any damages.
“7. Admit that there is no admissible evidence to support YOUR claims against [Defendant].
“8. Admit that it was not foreseeable for YOU to be assaulted after [Defendant] drove YOU home.
“9. Admit that it was not foreseeable for YOU to be assaulted after [Defendant] drove YOU home to the correct location at the usual time.
“10 Admit that YOU were driven home to the correct location at the usual time.
“11. Admit that [Defendant] drove YOU home to the correct location.”
Freddie Hafner
2365 Whittier Blvd.
La Habra CA 90631
Freddie Hafner CDCR # BV9289, Facility A-5 213
P.O. Box 3100
Chino, CA 91708
Freddie Hafner CDCR # BV9289, Facility A-5 213
P.O. Box 368 Chino, CA 91708
Freddie Hafner CDCR # BV9289, Facility G-5 217
P.O. Box 441 Chino, CA 91728
(See Singer dec. ¶ 4 & exh. A.)
Haffner did not serve timely responses to the requests for admission and had not served responses by the time Defendant filed this motion.
The Court grants Defendant’s motion and deems admitted the truth of the matters specified in Defendant’s requests for admission.
Sanctions are mandatory under Code of Civil Procedure section 2033.280, subdivision (c). The Court awards Defendant $490.00 based on two hours of attorney time and one filing fee.
CONCLUSION
The Court GRANTS Defendant Graceful Senescence Adult Day Health Care, Inc. dba Forever Caring Adult Day Health Care’s motion to deem admitted the truth of matters specified in requests for admission, set one, served on Plaintiff Rose Martinez’s successor-in-interest Freddie Haffner.
The Court GRANTS Defendant Graceful Senescence Adult Day Health Care, Inc. dba Forever Caring Adult Day Health Care’s request for sanctions and orders Plaintiff Rose Martinez’s successor-in-interest Freddie Haffner to pay Defendant $490.00 by January 29, 2025.
Moving party is ordered to give notice of this ruling.
Moving party is ordered to file the proof of service of this ruling with the Court within five days.