Judge: Lisa R. Jaskol, Case: 22STCV10968, Date: 2024-01-09 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 22STCV10968 Hearing Date: January 9, 2024 Dept: 28
Having considered the moving papers, the Court rules as follows.
BACKGROUND
On April 1, 2022, Plaintiff Elizabeth Martinez (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Defendants South Bay Med Spa PC (“Defendant”) and Does 1-50 for premises liability and negligence.
On August 17, 2022, Plaintiff filed a first amended complaint for general negligence. The Court’s file does not contain a proof of service of the first amended complaint.
On July 25, 2023, Defendant filed an answer to the complaint.
On November 14, 2023, Plaintiff filed motions (1) to compel Defendant’s responses and production in response to Plaintiff’s demand for inspection and copying, set one, and for sanctions, (2) to compel Defendant’s responses to Plaintiff’s special interrogatories, set one, and for sanctions, (3) to compel Defendant’s responses to form interrogatories, set one, and for sanctions, (4) to deem admitted matters specified in Plaintiff’s requests for admissions, set one, and for sanctions. Three of the motions were scheduled to be heard on January 9, 2024. The fourth motion (concerning Plaintiff’s demand for inspection and copying) was set to be heard on January 4, 2024 and was continued to January 9, 2024. Defendant has not filed oppositions.
Trial is currently scheduled for January 16, 2025.
PARTY’S REQUESTS
Plaintiff requests that the Court compel Defendant’s responses to Plaintiff’s demand for inspection and copying, special interrogatories, and form interrogatories, deem admitted matters specified in requests for admission, and award sanctions.
LEGAL STANDARD
A. Inspection demand
Code of Civil Procedure section 2031.300 provides:
“If a party to whom a demand for inspection, copying, testing, or sampling is directed fails to serve a timely response to it, the following rules shall apply:
“(a) The party to whom the demand for inspection, copying, testing, or sampling is directed waives any objection to the demand, 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 2031.210, 2031.220, 2031.230, 2031.240, and 2031.280.
“(2) The party’s failure to serve a timely response was the result of mistake, inadvertence, or excusable neglect.
“(b) The party making the demand may move for an order compelling response to the demand.
“(c) Except as provided in subdivision (d), the court shall impose a monetary sanction under Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 2023.010) against any party, person, or attorney who unsuccessfully makes or opposes a motion to compel a response to a demand for inspection, copying, testing, or sampling, unless it finds that the one subject to the sanction acted with substantial justification or that other circumstances make the imposition of the sanction unjust. If a party then fails to obey the order compelling a response, the court may make those orders that are just, including the imposition of an issue sanction, an evidence sanction, or a terminating sanction under Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 2023.010). In lieu of or in addition to this sanction, the court may impose a monetary sanction under Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 2023.010).
“(d) (1) Notwithstanding subdivision (c), absent exceptional circumstances, the court shall not impose sanctions on a party or any attorney of a party for failure to provide electronically stored information that has been lost, damaged, altered, or overwritten as a result of the routine, good faith operation of an electronic information system.
“(2) This subdivision shall not be construed to alter any obligation to preserve discoverable information.”
(Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.300.)
B. Interrogatories
Code of Civil Procedure section 2030.290 provides:
“If a party to whom interrogatories are directed fails to serve a timely response, the following rules apply:
“(a) The party to whom the interrogatories are directed waives any right to exercise the option to produce writings under Section 2030.230, as well as any objection to the interrogatories, 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 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.
“(b) The party propounding the interrogatories may move for an order compelling response to the interrogatories.
“(c) The court shall impose a monetary sanction under Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 2023.010) against any party, person, or attorney who unsuccessfully makes or opposes a motion to compel a response to interrogatories, unless it finds that the one subject to the sanction acted with substantial justification or that other circumstances make the imposition of the sanction unjust. If a party then fails to obey an order compelling answers, the court may make those orders that are just, including the imposition of an issue sanction, an evidence sanction, or a terminating sanction under Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 2023.010). In lieu of or in addition to that sanction, the court may impose a monetary sanction under Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 2023.010).”
(Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.290.)
C. Requests for admission
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.)
D. Discovery sanctions
“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. The court may also impose this sanction on one unsuccessfully asserting that another has engaged in the misuse of the discovery process, or on any attorney who advised that assertion, or on both. If a monetary sanction is authorized by any provision of this title, the court shall impose that sanction unless it 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., § 2023.030, subd. (a).)
“Misuses of the discovery process include, but are not limited to, the following:
* * *
“(d) Failing to respond or to submit to an authorized method of discovery.”
(Code Civ. Proc., § 2023.010, subd. (d).)
DISCUSSION
On July 31, 2023, Plaintiff served a demand for inspection and copying, set one, special interrogatories, set one, form interrogatories, set one, and requests for admissions, set one, on Defendant.
Defendant did not provide timely responses to the discovery requests. Defendant had not provided responses by the time Plaintiff filed these motions.
The Court grants the motion to compel responses to the demand for inspection and copying, set one, and orders Defendant to provide verified code-compliant responses and to produce the documents, electronically stored information, and/or other things requested without objections by February 8, 2024.
The Court grants the motions to compel responses to the special interrogatories, set one, and the form interrogatories, set one, and orders Defendant to provide verified code-compliant responses to the interrogatories without objections by February 8, 2024.
The Court grants the motion to deem admitted matters specified in requests for admission. The matters specified in the requests for admission are deemed admitted.
Plaintiff requests monetary sanctions of $960.00 for each motion based on 2.25 hours of attorney time at a rate of $400.00 per hour and one $60.00 filing fee. Counsel spent 1.5 hours preparing each motion and anticipated spending .5 hours to prepare the reply and .25 hours to attend the hearing.
The motions are substantially similar and are set to be heard together. The Court awards sanctions of $1,240.00 for the four motions based on four hours of attorney’s work at a reasonable rate of $250.00 per hour and four filing fees.
CONCLUSION
The Court GRANTS Plaintiff Elizabeth Martinez’s motion to compel responses to Plaintiff’s form interrogatories, set one, and orders Defendant South Bay Med Spa PC to provide verified code-compliant responses to the form interrogatories without objections by February 8, 2024.
The Court GRANTS Plaintiff Elizabeth Martinez’s motion to deem admitted matters specified in requests for admission, set one, and deems those matters admitted.
The Court GRANTS Plaintiff Elizabeth Martinez’s request for sanctions and orders Defendant South Bay Med Spa PC and its counsel to pay Plaintiff Elizabeth Martinez Defendant $1,240.00 by February 8, 2024.
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.