Judge: Margaret L. Oldendorf, Case: 23AHCV00021, Date: 2023-09-18 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23AHCV00021    Hearing Date: September 18, 2023    Dept: P

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

NORTHEAST DISTRICT

 

JOSE BLANCO, et al.,

 

                                            Plaintiffs,

vs.

 

LEVON H. BARDAKJIAN, et al.,

 

                                            Defendants,

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)
)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 23AHCV00021

 

 

[TENTATIVE] ORDER ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION, SET ONE

 

Date:   September 18, 2023

Time:  8:30 a.m.

Dept.:  P

 

          I.        INTRODUCTION

          This multi-plaintiff action alleges claims by residents of an apartment complex against their landlords. The pleading alleges dangerous conditions and health hazards at the property and sets forth claims for negligence, breach of warranty of habitability, and related causes of action.

          Before the Court is a motion by Defendant 1001 Las Lomas, LLC for an order compelling five of the plaintiffs to provide responses to Requests for Production, Set One.

          Because the notice of motion indicates that this hearing will take place at the Alhambra Courthouse, it cannot properly be granted. At the upcoming October 5, 2023, hearing on the motions to be relieved as counsel by Plaintiffs’ counsel, the Court will provide a new hearing date. Defendant will then be ordered to provide proper notice.

 

II.       LEGAL STANDARD

          Code Civ. Proc. §2031.300 provides that if a party to whom an inspection demand has been directed fails to serve a timely response to it, that party has waived the right to object and the party making the demand may move for an order compelling response to the demand. Subdivision (c) provides for the imposition of a monetary sanction against any party who unsuccessfully makes or opposes a motion under this section, unless the court finds that the one subject to sanction acted with substantial justification or other circumstances make the imposition of a sanction unfair.

 

III.     ANALYSIS

          The evidence offered in support of this motion establishes that Defendant served Plaintiffs Jacinta Blanco, Jose Blanco, Malchaedaedla Blanco, Maria Castaneda, and Martin Castaneda each with Requests for Production of Documents, Set One. The discovery was served April 10, 2023. Declaration of Patrick Torsney, ¶2 and Exhibit A. No responses to this discovery have been provided. Id. at ¶4.

          This motion has not been opposed. However, on September 5, 2023, Plaintiffs’ counsel filed a declaration indicating that there has been a breakdown of the attorney client relationship with these five plaintiffs. She states that all are low-income, and requests that monetary sanctions not be imposed.

          On September 11, 2023, Malchaedaedla Blanco, Maria Castaneda, and Martin Castaneda dismissed their claims. The motion is therefore moot as to those plaintiffs.

          Plaintiffs’ counsel has calendared motions to be relieved as to the other plaintiffs, Jacinta Blanco, Jose Blanco. Those motions are set for hearing October 5, 2023.

          Given the evidence before the Court, Defendant is likely entitled to the relief requested. However, the motion is defective in that according to the notice provided this hearing will occur at the Alhambra Courthouse. In order for the Plaintiffs against whom this motion is directed to have proper notice, a new hearing date will be provided on October 5, 2023.

 

IV.     ORDER

          The hearing on Defendant 1001 Las Lomas, LLC’s motion to compel responses to Requests for Production, Set One, is continued to October 5, 2023. The hearing date will be continued to a new date on that day. The hearing date must be included in the orders relieving Plaintiffs’ counsel (if granted). Additionally, Defendant will be ordered to provide proper notice of the hearing, either to Plaintiffs’ counsel of record or directly on the plaintiffs if they are at that point self-represented.

          Plaintiffs’ counsel is ordered to give notice.

 

         

Dated:                                                              _______________________________

                                                                              MARGARET L. OLDENDORF

                                                                       JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT