Judge: Mark A. Young, Case: 23SMCV02140, Date: 2024-02-02 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23SMCV02140    Hearing Date: March 7, 2024    Dept: M

CASE NAME:           Hunter v. Burris

CASE NO.:                23SMCV02140

MOTION:                  Motion to Compel Initial Discovery Responses as to Form Interrogatories

HEARING DATE:   3/7/2024

 

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.) 

 

Analysis

 

            Plaintiff James Hunter moves for an order compelling Defendant Darren Burris to serve verified answers, without objections, to Form Interrogatories, set one (“FROGs”). Plaintiff served Defendant with the FROGs on June 28, 2023. (Hunter Decl., ¶ 5, Ex. 1.) Responses were therefore due on August 2, 2023. Defendant did not respond. (¶ 7.) Defendant submitted an opposition declaration on October 24, 2023, but the declaration does not address the merits of this motion. Given Defendant’s unexplained failure to respond, the motion to compel is GRANTED.

 

            Finally, the Court would request some clarification at the hearing regarding service of the FROGs on Burris.  The proof of service shows Burris personally served on June 28, 2023.  While current counsel formally substituted into the matter on July 5, 2023 (and Burris was pro per at the time), when Burris answered the complaint on June 14, 2023, he was represented by the same counsel.