Judge: Mark A. Young, Case: 24SMCV00706, Date: 2024-08-13 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24SMCV00706    Hearing Date: August 13, 2024    Dept: M

CASE NAME:           Blanco, et al., v. HM DG Inc., et al.

CASE NO.:                24SMCV00706

MOTION:                  Motion to Compel Initial and Further Discovery Responses

HEARING DATE:   8/13/2024

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. 

ANALYSIS 

Plaintiffs Fabrizio and Natalia Blanco move to compel Defendant HM DG Inc. to provide initial discovery responses within 10 days, without objections, to the following discovery: 1) Requests for Production of Documents (RPD), Set One; 2) Special Interrogatories (SROG), Set One; and 3) Form Interrogatories (FROG), Set One. On July 15, 2024, Plaintiffs also filed a motion to compel further responses to RPDs, set one and SROGs, set one. Plaintiff requests sanctions of $1,300.00 per motion.

Compel Initial Responses to RPDs; Further Responses to RPDs and SROGs

Plaintiffs show that there were objection-only responses to the subject RPDs. Thus, the proper motion to bring is a motion to compel further. (CCP § 2031.300.)

As to the motions to compel further, such motions must always be accompanied by a separate statement containing the requests and the responses, verbatim, as well as reasons why a further response is warranted. (CRC, Rule 3.1345.) Plaintiffs have not provided any separate statement in support of their motions to compel further.

Accordingly, the motions to compel initial and further responses to the first set of RPDs and the motion to compel further responses to the SROGs are DENIED.

Compel Initial Responses to SROGs/FROGs

On April 29, 2024, Plaintiffs served FROGs, Set One, on HMDG. The original response deadline was May 31, 2024. (Kakoian Decl., ¶¶ 2-3.) HMDG failed to serve timely responses. (Id., ¶ 4.) On June 5, 2024, Plaintiffs' counsel sent a meet and confer email to HMDG's counsel, requesting HMDG's failure to respond and requesting verified responses within 10 days. (¶ 5.) Over the next month, HMDG repeatedly requested extensions while failing to provide proper responses but has not served verified responses to the interrogatories. (¶¶ 6-8.)

Defendant has not filed an opposition to the motions to compel initial responses to the interrogatories. Accordingly, the motions to compel are GRANTED. Sanctions are mandatory. The Court must sanction any party that unsuccessfully makes or opposes a motion to compel a further response, “unless it finds that the one subject to the sanction acted with substantial justification or that other circumstances make the imposition of the sanction unjust.” (CCP, § 2030.290(c).) As Defendant has failed to oppose, it has failed to justify its non-response. Sanctions are imposed in the reduced, total amount of $1,500.00, inclusive of costs against Defendant and counsel of record.

Responses are ordered within 10 days.  Sanctions are payable to Plaintiff’s counsel within 30 days.