Judge: Mark A. Young, Case: 23SMCV01255, Date: 2024-09-06 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23SMCV01255    Hearing Date: September 6, 2024    Dept: M

CASE NAME:           Creditors Adjustment Bureau Inc., v. Aram Construction Company

CASE NO.:                23SMCV01255

MOTION:                  Motion to Compel Initial Discovery Responses

HEARING DATE:   9/6/2024

Legal Standard

 If a party to whom interrogatories are directed fails to serve a timely response, the propounding party may move for an order compelling responses and for a monetary sanction. (CCP § 2030.290(b).) The statute contains no time limit for a motion to compel where no responses have been served. All that need be shown in the moving papers is that a set of interrogatories was properly served on the opposing party, that the time to respond has expired, and that no response of any kind has been served. (Leach v. Superior Court (1980) 111 Cal. App. 3d 902, 905-906.) 

Where there has been no timely response to a CCP section 2031.010 inspection demand, the demanding party must seek an order compelling a response. (CCP § 2031.300.) Failure to timely respond waives all objections, including privilege and work product. Thus, unless the party to whom the demand was directed obtains relief from waiver, he or she cannot raise objections to the documents demanded. There is no deadline for a motion to compel responses. Likewise, for failure to respond, the moving party need not attempt to resolve the matter outside court before filing the motion. Where the motion seeks only a response to the inspection demand, no showing of "good cause" is required. 

Pursuant to CCP section 2033.280(b), a party may move for an order that the genuineness of any documents and the truth of any matters specified in the requests be deemed admitted, as well as for a monetary sanction under Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 2023.010). “Failure to timely respond to RFA does not result in automatic admissions. Rather, the propounder of the RFA must ‘move for an order that the genuineness of any documents and the truth of any matters specified in the requests be deemed admitted, as well as for a monetary sanction’ under § 2023.010 et seq.” (CCP, § 2033.280(b).) The court “shall” grant the motion to deem RFA admitted, “unless it finds that the party to whom the requests for admission have been directed has served, before the hearing on the motion, a proposed response to the requests for admission that is in substantial compliance with Section 2033.220.” (CCP, § 2033.280(c).) 

ANALYSIS 

Plaintiff Creditors Adjustment Bureau, Inc. moves to compel Defendant Aram Construction Company to provide initial responses to Plaintiff's Form Interrogatories, Set One, Requests for Production of Documents, Set One; and that the Request for Admission, Set One, be deemed admitted. Plaintiff also requests sanctions against Defendant and counsel of record, F. Michael Sabzevar, in the amount of $1,560.00 for the reasonable expenses and attorney's fees incurred by the moving party in connection with this motion.

On June 13, 2024, Plaintiff served Defendant with the subject discovery. (Jun Decl., Ex. 1.) Defendant did not timely respond to the subject discovery. (Id., ¶ 4.)

In opposition, Defendant filed a declaration of counsel, who takes blame for not responding to the Request for Admission, Set One, and states that he has served substantially code-compliant responses to the requests. (Sabzevar Decl., Ex. A.) Counsel’s declaration does not address the RPDs or FROGs. In reply, Plaintiff notes that Defendant has provided substantive responses to the FROGs. Accordingly, the motions are MOOT as to the FROGs and the RFAs.

Defendant does not address the RPDs at all, and the responses are still outstanding. Therefore, the motion to compel is GRANTED as to RPD, set one. Mandatory sanctions are granted in the reduced total amount of $2,180.00 against Defendant and counsel of record. Sanctions are to be paid to Plaintiff’s counsel of record within 30 days.  Responses are ordered within 10 days.