Judge: Lynne M. Hobbs, Case: 22STCV30714, Date: 2023-10-13 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV30714    Hearing Date: January 17, 2024    Dept: 30

HOVEK ARZOOIAN vs MARICELA ESPINOZA, et al

TENTATIVE

Defendant Maricela Espinoza’s motions to compel responses to form interrogatories, and requests for production for documents are GRANTED.

Plaintiff Hovek Arzooian is ordered to provide responses without objection to Defendant’s request for form interrogatories, set one, and request for production, set one, within 20 days of this order.

Defendant’s request for sanctions is DENIED.

Moving party is ordered to give notice.

Discussion

On May 23, 2023, Defendant served Form Interrogatories, Set One, and Request for Production of Documents, Set One, on Plaintiff. (Alban Decl., Exhs. A.) Responses were not provided despite multiple extensions being granted to respond. (Id., ¶¶ 3-6.)

As Defendant properly served discovery requests and Plaintiff has failed to serve responses, the Court finds Defendant is entitled to a court order directing Plaintiff to provide verified responses without objections to the discovery requests served on Plaintiff. Therefore, the motions are granted.

As for sanctions, Defendant has not identified who she seeks sanctions against in the notice of motions. Under Code of Civil Procedure section 2023.040, “A request for a sanction shall, in the notice of motion, identify every person, party, and attorney against whom the sanction is sought, and specify the type of sanction sought.” As such, the request is denied for inadequate notice.

Moreover, sanctions are only mandatory in connection with motions to compel responses to interrogatories and request for production when the motion was unsuccessfully opposed. (Code Civ. Proc. §§ 2030.290(c), 2031.300(c).) The motions were not opposed. As such, the request for sanctions is denied for this independent basis.

Lastly, Defendant’s request for sanctions under CCP section 2023.010 for the misuse of discovery is also denied, as "sections 2023.010 and 2023.030 do not independently authorize the trial court to impose monetary sanctions for misuse of discovery.” (City of Los Angeles v. PricewaterhouseCoopers, LLC (2022) 84 Cal.App.5th 466, 504.)