Judge Lynette Gridiron Winston, Case Number: 24PSCV03894, Date: 2025-01-23 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Lynette Gridiron Winston, Case: 24PSCV03894, Date: 2025-01-23 Tentative Ruling

CASE NAME: Earline Wilbourn v. Foremost Insurance Company Grand Rapids, Michigan

1. Respondent Foremost Insurance Company Grand Rapids, Michigan’s Motion to Compel Response to Request for Production of Documents;

2. Respondent Foremost Insurance Company Grand Rapids, Michigan’s Motion to Compel Answers to Form Interrogatories; and

3. Respondent Foremost Insurance Company Grand Rapids, Michigan’s Motion for Order That Matters Set Forth in Request For Admission (Set One) Be Deemed Admitted

The Court summarily DENIES Foremost Insurance Company Grand Rapids, Michigan’s motion to compel response to Request for Production of Documents without prejudice.

The Court GRANTS Foremost’s motion to compel answers to Form Interrogatories and motion for order that matters set forth in Request for Admission (Set One) by deemed admitted. The Court hereby deems the truth of the matters specified in Request for Admission (Set One) admitted and conclusively established as to Earline Wilbourn. The Court also orders Earline Wilbourn to provide verified, code-compliant responses, without objection, to Form Interrogatories (Set Number One), within 20 days of the Court’s order.

The Court further GRANTS Foremost’s requests for monetary sanctions in the amount of $585.00, plus the $60.00 filing fee, for each motion, for a total of $1,290.00. Earline Wilbourne must pay said monetary sanctions to counsel for Foremost within 20 days of the Court’s order.

Foremost Insurance Company Grand Rapids, Michigan is ordered to give notice of the Court’s ruling within five calendar days of this order.

This is an uninsured motorist action. On November 8, 2024, Foremost Insurance Company Grand Rapids, Michigan (Foremost) filed an application for case number in connection with an uninsured motorist arbitration proceeding involving Earline Wilbourn (Wilbourn).

On December 18, 2024, Foremost filed multiple discovery motions against Wilbourn. The motions are unopposed.

The trial courts have exclusive jurisdiction over discovery disputes in uninsured motorist arbitrations. (Miranda v. 21st Century Ins. Co. (2004) 117 Cal.App.4th 913, 926; see Ins. Code, § 11580.2, subd. (f).)

When a party fails to serve a timely response to interrogatories, the party propounding the interrogatories may move for an order compelling a response. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.290, subd. (b).) A party who fails to provide a timely response waives any objection, including one based on privilege or work product. (Id., § 2030.290, subd. (a).) “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 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.” (Id., § 2030.290, subd. (c).)

When a party fails to serve a timely response to an inspection demand, the party making the demand may move for an order compelling a response to the inspection demand. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.300, subd. (b).) A party who fails to provide a timely response waives any objection, including one based on privilege or work product. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.300, subd. (a).) “[T]he 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 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.” (Id., § 2031.300, subd. (c).)

When a party fails to serve a timely response to a request for admission, the party propounding the request for admission may move for an order to deem the genuineness of any documents and the truth of any matters specified in the requests admitted. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.280, subd. (b).) A party who fails to provide a timely response waives any objection, including one based on privilege or work product. (Id., § 2033.280, subd. (a).) “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… on the party or attorney, or both, whose failure to serve a timely response to requests for admission necessitated this motion.” (Id., § 2033.280, subd. (c).)

Although meeting and conferring is not required before bringing motions to compel, the Court does request that parties meet and confer in person, by telephone, or by video conference before bringing any motions. (Sinaiko Healthcare Consulting, Inc. v. Pacific Healthcare Consultants (2007) 148 Cal.App.4th 390, 404; Dept. 6 Courtroom Information.) The Court requests that Foremost attempt to meet and confer in person, by telephone, or by video conference going forward. (Wilson Decls., ¶ 4.)

Foremost indicates having served written discovery on Wilbourn, namely Request for Production of Documents (Set Number One) on April 4, 2024, Form Interrogatories (Set Number One) on April 25, 2024, and Request for Admission (Set One) on April 25, 2024. (Wilson Decls., ¶ 3, Ex. A.) Foremost indicates that no responses have been received to those discovery requests. (Wilson Decls., ¶ 4, Ex. B.)

The Court notes that the proof of service for the motion to compel responses to Request for Production of Documents (Set Number One) does not indicate any particular method of service. (Motion to Compel Response to Request for Production of Documents (12/18/24), pp. 48-49 of pdf.) It is unclear to the Court whether proper service was effected on Wilbourn. Without proper notice, this Court lacks jurisdiction to consider the motion. (Diaz v. Pro. Cmty. Mgmt., Inc. (2017) 16 Cal.App.5th 1190, 1204.) The Court therefore summarily DENIES the motion to compel responses to Request for Production of Documents (Set Number One) without prejudice.

Foremost’s other motions contain proper proofs of service evidencing service on Wilbourn’s counsel. (Motion to Compel Answers to Form Interrogatories (12/18/24), ¶¶ 52-53 of pdf; Motion for Order That Matters Set Forth in Request for Admission (Set One) be Deemed Admitted (12/18/24), pp. 46-47 of pdf.) The Court finds these motions well taken and GRANTS them. The Court hereby deems the truth of the matters specified in Request for Admission (Set One) admitted and conclusively established as to Wilbourn. The Court also orders Wilbourn to provide verified, code-compliant responses, without objection, to Form Interrogatories (Set Number One), within 20 days of the Court’s order.

The Court further DENIES Foremost’s requests for monetary sanctions in connection with the motion to compel responses to Request for Production of Documents (Set Number One). The Court GRANTS Foremost’s remaining requests for monetary sanctions in the amount of $585.00 per motion, comprised of 3.0 hours preparing the motion and appearing at the hearing on the motions, multiplied by the hourly rate of $175.00, plus the $60.00 filing fee per motion, for a grand total of $1,290.00.[1]

The Court summarily DENIES Foremost Insurance Company Grand Rapids, Michigan’s motion to compel response to Request for Production of Documents without prejudice.

Foremost Insurance Company Grand Rapids, Michigan is ordered to give notice of the Court’s ruling within five calendar days of this order.

[1] The caption on the notice of motion to deem matters admitted mentions $960.00 in monetary sanctions, but then the body of the notice and motion both indicate $585.00. (See Notice & Memorandum of Points & Authorities in support of Motion for Order That Matters Set Forth in Request for Admission (Set One) be Deemed Admitted (12/18/24).) The Court infers that the $960.00 in the caption was a typo and that the correct amount requested is $585.00.