Judge: Malcolm Mackey, Case: 20STCV11249, Date: 2023-04-13 Tentative Ruling


Case Number: 20STCV11249    Hearing Date: April 13, 2023    Dept: 55

HENDRIX v. KTLA, LLC                                                  20STCV11249

Hearing Date:  4/13/23,  Dept. 55

#4:   MOTION FOR REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS BE DEEMED ADMITTED.

 

Notice:  Okay

No Opposition

 

MP:  Defendant NEXSTAR INC.

RP:  

 

Summary

 

On 3/20/20, Plaintiff BERNIE HENDRIX filed a Complaint.

On 7/6/21, Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint, alleging that the employer constructively terminated Plaintiff’s employment as camera operator, including by allowing ongoing sexual harassment by a coworker, and reducing hours, in retaliation for Plaintiff’s complaining about the harassment instead of putting up with it in order to get along with the other employee.

The causes of action are:

1) SEXUAL HARASSMENT, HOSTILE WORK ENVIRONMENT (CAL. GOV. CODE § 12940(J))

2) DISCRIMINATION (CAL. GOV. CODE § 12940(A))

3) RETALIATION FOR OPPOSING DISCRIMINATION AND HARASSMENT (CAL. GOV. CODE § 12940(H))

4) WRONGFUL CONSTRUCTIVE TERMINATION IN VIOLATION OF PUBLIC POLICY

5) FAILURE TO TAKE STEPS TO PREVENT HARASSMENT, DISCRIMINATION AND RETALIATION (CAL. GOV. CODE § 12940(K))

6) SEXUAL ASSAULT AND BATTERY

7) NEGLIGENT HIRING, SUPERVISION, AND RETENTION

8) NEGLIGENT INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS

9) INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS.

 

 

MP Positions

 

Moving party requests an order deeming admitted requests for admission, on grounds including the following:

 

·         Defendant Nexstar propounded RFA Set 1 to Plaintiff on February 3, 2023.

·         Plaintiff’s responses to Nexstar’s RFAs Set 1 were due on March 10, 2023.

·         Plaintiff has not served any response or objections to the RFAs.

·         Plaintiff did not seek any extension of time, raise any objections or provide code-compliant responses (or any responses) or agree to do so. As such, any objections are waived and Plaintiff cannot claim excusable neglect.

 

 

Tentative Ruling

 

The unopposed motion is granted, as prayed.

A motion to deem admitted requests for admissions lies based upon a showing of failure to respond timely.  CCP §2033.280(b);  Demyer v. Costa Mesa Mobile Home Estates (1995) 36 Cal.App.4th 393, 395, disapproved on other grounds by  Wilcox v. Birtwhistle (1999) 21 Cal.4th 973, 983.

*IF PARTIES WOULD LIKE TO SUBMIT ON THE COURT’S TENTATIVE RULING, PLEASE CALL THE COURTROOM AT 213-633-0655*