Judge: Malcolm Mackey, Case: 21STCV39486, Date: 2023-03-06 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV39486    Hearing Date: March 6, 2023    Dept: 55

LEWIS v. UPCHURCH                                                       21STCV39486

Hearing Date:  3/6/23,  Dept. 55

#3:   MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSES TO FORM INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS IN THE AMOUNT OF $6,930.

 

Notice:  Okay

No Opposition

 

MP:  Defendants

RP:  

 

 

Summary

 

On 10/26/21, Plaintiff TONY LEWIS filed a Complaint against defendants, JASON E. UPCHURCH, personal representative of the Estate of DARLENE J. UPCHURCH-FRIEDMAN and  JEFFERSON LA BREA D&J PROPERTIES, LLC, alleging that this is an action for Declaratory Relief, Breach of Contract and related claims, arising out of a written one-page partnership agreement entered into in 2011, between Plaintiff and the decedent DARLENE UPCHURCH-FRIEDMAN, providing Plaintiff with a 30% ownership interest in specified real property.

On 8/18/22, Defendant JEFFERSON LA BREA D&J PROPERTIES, LLC filed a notice of bankruptcy stay.

 

MP Positions

 

Moving parties request an order compelling Plaintiff’s further responses to form interrogatories, and awarding $6,930.00 as sanctions, on grounds including the following:

 

·         Lewis served conclusory, evasive, and incomplete responses to Form Interrogatories Nos. 9.1, 9.2, 12.6, 17.1, and 50.2.

·         Lewis has made little effort to provide basic information about when alleged investments occurred or the amount of each.  Lewis has not provided any facts about the acts he took to manage the LLC and the property, including what acts Lewis took and when. Lewis has not provided any facts about the “rental income” he allegedly received, including how much, when, and from whom. Lewis has not provided any facts about the thousands of dollars that he allegedly provided to the LLC and the property, including how much money he provided, when he provided this money, and for what purpose.  Lewis’s response provides no identifying information about any of the documents that purportedly support his denials of the requests for admission. Lewis has not stated the dates, titles, authors, recipients, or bates numbers of any of the documents.  Lewis does not describe any of the five alleged breaches and does not give the date of any of the five alleged breaches.

·         Meeting and conferring was not fruitful.  Lewis never served supplemental responses as promised. 

·         The Bankruptcy stay does not extend to Lewis’s claims against Defendant, or the cross-claims against Lewis.

 

Tentative Ruling

 

The unopposed motion is granted, as prayed.

The failure to file a proper and timely opposition in trial court creates a waiver of the issues on any appeal.  Bell v. Am. Title Ins. Co. (1991) 226 Cal. App. 3d 1589, 1602;  Cabrini Villas Homeowners Assn. v. Haghverdian (2003) 111 Cal. App. 4th 683, 693.  A judge in a civil case is not "'obligated to seek out theories [a party] might have advanced, or to articulate … that which … [a party] has left unspoken.'"  Mesecher v. County of San Diego (1992) 9 Cal. App. 4th 1677, 1686.