Judge: Lynne M. Hobbs, Case: 24STCV20747, Date: 2025-03-24 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24STCV20747    Hearing Date: March 24, 2025    Dept: 61

LORENA CANTER vs LOS ANGELES TIMES COMMUNICATIONS, LLC, A LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, et al.

Tentative

Plaintiff Lorena Canter’s Motions to Compel Responses to Special Interrogatories from Defendant Man Staffing, LLC is GRANTED. Defendant Man Staffing, LLC is ordered to serve the compelled responses, without objections, and within 20 days of Notice of Ruling. Sanctions are awarded against Defendant in the amount of $810.00, and payable within 60 days.  

Moving party to give notice.

Analysis

I. MOTION TO COMPEL

A propounding party may demand a responding party to produce documents that are in their possession, custody or control. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.010.) A party may likewise conduct discovery by propounding interrogatories to another party to be answered under oath. (Code Civ. Proc. § 2030.010, subd. (a).) The responding party must respond to the production demand either by complying, by representing that the party lacks the ability to comply, or by objecting to the demand. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.210.) The responding party must respond to the interrogatories by answering or objecting. (Code Civ. Proc. § 2030.210, subd. (a).) If the responding party fails to serve timely responses, the propounding party may move for an order compelling responses to the production demand and interrogatories. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.290, 2031.300.) A party who fails to serve a timely response to interrogatories or a demand for inspection waives any objection to the demand. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.290, 2031.300.)

Plaintiff Lorena Canter(Plaintiff) served special interrogatories on October 15, 2024, to Defendant Man Staffing, LLC (Defendant). (Chami Decl. ¶ 2.) Despite agreeing to extend the deadline for response to December 2, 2024, no responses were served by that date, and none have yet been served. (Chami Decl. ¶¶ 3–7.)

Plaintiff has shown that no responses have been provided to properly served discovery. Defendant has filed no opposition to the present motions.

The motions are therefore GRANTED.

II. SANCTIONS

The prevailing party on a motion to compel is generally entitled to monetary sanctions, unless the court “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. §§ 2030.290, 2031.300.) Sanctions are also mandatory against a party whose failure to serve responses to requests for admission makes the motion necessary. (Code Civ. Proc. § 2033.280, subd. (c).)

Plaintiff seeks $2,310.00 in sanctions against Defendant and its counsel, representing three hours of attorney work at $750 per hour, plus a $60 filing fee. (Chami Decl. ¶¶ 7–8.) This includes one hour of work for preparing a reply to an opposition that was never filed. Even so, the Court awards sanctions in the reduced amount of $810.00.