Judge: Lynne M. Hobbs, Case: 22STCV36689, Date: 2023-12-11 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV36689    Hearing Date: December 12, 2023    Dept: 30

CANDIDA LISSETH CANALES MARTINEZ, et al. vs ISABEL MOORE

Motion to Compel Responses to Request for Production of Documents

TENTATIVE

Defendant Isabel Moore’s motion to compel responses to demand for inspection of documents, set one, is GRANTED. Plaintiff Candida Lisseth Canales Martinez is ordered to provide responses without objections to Defendant’s demand for inspection of documents within 20 days of this order.

Defendant’s request for sanctions is DENIED.

Moving party is ordered to give notice.

Discussion

On April 19, 2023, Defendant served on Plaintiff, Demand for Inspection of Documents, Set One. (Lira Decl., Exh. A.) Responses were due by May 22, 2023. (Id., ¶ 3.) To date, no responses to the discovery were provided. (Id., ¶ 4.)

As Defendant properly served the discovery request and Plaintiff failed to provide any 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 motion is granted.

Defendant also requests sanctions. Code of Civil Procedure § 2031.300(c) allows for sanctions when the motion is unsuccessfully opposed. Here, as the motion was not opposed, the request for sanctions is denied.

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.)