Judge: Malcolm Mackey, Case: 21STCV02768, Date: 2023-01-06 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV02768    Hearing Date: January 6, 2023    Dept: 55

LEVI v. DAHAN                                                      21STCV02768

Hearing Date:  1/6/22,  Dept. 55

#7:   MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSES TO FORM INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE; REQUEST FOR COMPENSATORY SANCTIONS IN THE AMOUNT OF $4,250.00.

Notice:  Okay

Opposition

MP:  Defendants 2695 EDEN DAHAN.

RP:  Plaintiff ELIRAN LEVI.

Summary

On 1/22/21, plaintiffs ELIRAN LEVI, et al., filed a Complaint.

On 8/10/21, plaintiffs filed a First Amended Complaint, alleging that they entered into a contract with defendants to invest in construction and development of a real property, and provided money to defendants to be used for expenses, but defendants did not give plaintiffs their fair share of proceeds from selling the property.

The causes of action are:

1. BREACH OF CONTRACT;

2. BREACH OF THE COVENANT OF GOOD FAITH AND FAIR DEALING;

3. BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY;

4. CONSTRUCTIVE FRAUD;

5. CONVERSION;

6. UNJUST ENRICHMENT.

On 1/20/22, a demurrer to the First Amended Complaint, filed by 2695 HIDDEN VALLEY LLC, BUILDERS GREEN REMODELING, INC., was sustained without leave to amend.

MP Positions

Moving party requests an order Plaintiff’s further responses to form interrogatories, and awarding $4,250.00 sanctions, on grounds including the following:

·         In each objection, Responding Party states a boilerplate objection, or states that the Responding Party is unable to respond, without providing any reason why.

·         Plaintiff failed to acknowledge receipt of the Meet and Confer letter.

RP Positions

Opposing party advocates denying the motion, for reasons including the following:

·         Defendant's motions, set for hearing on different dates, are moot. Plaintiff served further verified responses and documents to the entire set of discovery at issue. The original responses no longer form any basis for the motions. Plaintiff produced further responses to all written discovery requests and produced over 1520 pages of documents.

·         Plaintiff never received a copy of the alleged meet and confer letter as stated by defendants on July 29, 2022 nor on August 8, 2022.

·         Imposition of sanctions under the circumstances is not appropriate. Defendants should not be awarded for dishonesty and trickery in discovery.

Tentative Ruling

The motion is ordered off calendar, in light of supplemental responses subsequently served.

Where respondents served discovery responses after parties have filed motions to compel responses, courts have broad discretion as to ruling, including ordering the motion off calendar while requiring the propounding party to file a motion to compel further responses based on the recent responses.  Sinaiko Healthcare Consulting, Inc., v. Klugman (2007) 148 Cal.App.4th 390, 409.