Judge: Margaret L. Oldendorf, Case: 21GDCV00167, Date: 2023-03-23 Tentative Ruling


Case Number: 21GDCV00167    Hearing Date: March 23, 2023    Dept: P

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

NORTHEAST DISTRICT

 

JAN BORKOWSKI, an individual and ANNA BORKOWSKI, an individual,

 

                                            Plaintiffs,

vs.

 

PAUL BARBU, an individual and ANCA C. BARBU, an individual, and CEDONIA [a Nevada corporation] and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive,

 

                                            Defendants.

And related cross-action.

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)
)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 21GDCV00167

 

[TENTATIVE] ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT ANCA BARBU’S MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO INTERROGATORIES AND DEMANDS FOR PRODUCTION FROM PLAINTIFF ANNA BORKOWSKI AND TO DEEM MATTERS ADMITTED

 

Date:   March 23, 2023

Time:  8:30 a.m.

Dept.:  P

 

          I.        INTRODUCTION

          This litigation concerns allegations of a fraudulent financial scheme. Plaintiffs Jan (Jan) and Anna (Anna) Borkowski allege they are a married couple who immigrated from Romania and that Defendant Paul Barbu (Paul), who immigrated from Romania years earlier than they did, befriended them and offered his services as a financial advisor. Based on his advice, Plaintiffs invested $310,000 with Paul Barbu’s company Cedonia.

          Plaintiffs allege that Paul first helped them purchase real estate, and then convinced them the following year to open a line of credit on their real property and allow him to invest the funds for them. Plaintiffs did what Paul suggested. Then they made a non-equity investment in the form of a loan with Cedonia. This money was then allegedly lent out to other third parties, who purchased real property and were supposed to make payments at 10% interest. When the 18-month term of the loan was up, Plaintiffs allege Paul convinced them to leave their money with him and allow him to reinvest it, which they did. Since that time, Plaintiffs allege they have made diligent and regular inquiries as to the status of their investment and Paul has repeatedly assured them their investment is safe. Plaintiffs allege that although Paul has from time to time made some payments, the loan has never been fully repaid.

          The discovery motions at issue here concern the claims against Paul Barbu’s daughter, Defendant Anca Barbu. The Complaint alleges that Anca is listed as Cedonia’s Director; and that Paul and Anca are also both listed as treasurer and president of another company, West Development Group. Plaintiffs allege that Paul and Anca purchased certain real property using assets “stolen” from the investments of others, including them, and that as a result of this alleged theft Anca, with the assistance of her father, purchased real property in Sherman Oaks. Anca has filed a cross-complaint for indemnity and contribution against Paul.

          Before the Court are three motions by Anca concerning discovery propounded on Plaintiff Anna Borkowski. Anna was served with form and special interrogatories, requests for production, and requests for admission. She failed to provide any responses. The motions are therefore granted. Monetary sanctions are also issued against Anna.

         

II.       ANALYSIS

          The Declarations of Paul Tokar, counsel for Anca, submitted in support of each motion provides a summary of pertinent events. According to Tokar, Defendant Anca served Plaintiff Anna with four sets of discovery: (1) Form Interrogatories, Set One; (2) Special Interrogatories, Set One; (3) Requests for Production of Documents, Set One; and (4) Requests for Admission, Set One. The time for providing responses expired, and no responses were provided. Anna’s counsel then requested and was granted two separate extensions of time to respond. The last extension expired February 6, 2023, again with no responses having been served.

          Defendant Anca seeks orders compelling Anna to provide responses, and an order deeming matters admitted. Code Civ. Proc. §§2030.290, 2031.300, and 2033.280 provide authority for such relief. Based on the undisputed evidence, Anca is entitled to the relief requested. The motions are therefore granted.

          These sections also provide authority for the granting of monetary sanctions. In the case of the requests for admissions, sanctions are mandatory. Anca seeks monetary sanctions against Anna in the amount of $960 for each of the three motions she filed.   Counsel’s hourly rate is $450, which the Court finds is reasonable. Mr. Tokar states that he spent one hour on each motion and expects to spend one hour on a reply and attending the hearing, which comes to $900. A $60 filing fee is added for each motion. These amounts are reasonable.   

 

III.     CONCLUSION AND ORDER

          Defendant Anca Barbu’s motions are granted. Plaintiff Anna Borkowski is ordered to provide verified responses, without objections, to Form Interrogatories, Set One; Special Interrogatories, Set One; and Requests for Production, Set One; within 10 days of notice of this order. The truth of the matters specified in Requests for Admission, Set One, are deemed admitted.

         

///

///

///

 

Plaintiff Anna Borkowski is further ordered to pay monetary sanctions in the total amount of $2,880 to Defendant Anca Barbu within 30 days of notice of this order.

          Defendant is ordered to provide notice.   

 

 

         

Dated:                                                              _______________________________

                                                                              MARGARET L. OLDENDORF

                                                                       JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT