Judge Mark E. Windham, Case 20STLC09495 2022-09-13 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Mark E. Windham, Case: 20STLC09495, Date: 2022-09-13 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 20STLC09495 Hearing Date: September 13, 2022 Dept: 26

MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS; REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS

(CCP §§ 2030.290, 2031.300, 2023.010)

TENTATIVE RULING:

Defendant Sonya Najera’s Motion to Compel Responses to Form Interrogatories, Set One, and Request for Sanctions is GRANTED. PLAINTIFF MAKAYLA HAWKINS IS ORDERED TO SERVE VERIFIED RESPONSES, WITHOUT OBJECTION, TO THE DISCOVERY REQUESTS WITHIN 20 DAYS’ SERVICE OF THIS ORDER. FURTHERMORE, PLAINTIFF MAKAYLA HAWKINS IS ORDERED TO PAY SANCTIONS OF $186.65 TO DEFENSE COUNSEL WITHIN 20 DAYS’ SERVICE OF THIS ORDER.

Defendant Sonya Najera’s Motion to Compel Responses to Request for Production of Documents, Set One, and Request for Sanctions is GRANTED. PLAINTIFF MILAN LACY IS ORDERED TO SERVE VERIFIED RESPONSES, WITHOUT OBJECTION, TO THE DISCOVERY REQUESTS WITHIN 20 DAYS’ SERVICE OF THIS ORDER. FURTHERMORE, PLAINTIFF MILAN LACY IS ORDERED TO PAY SANCTIONS OF $186.65 TO DEFENSE COUNSEL WITHIN 20 DAYS’ SERVICE OF THIS ORDER.

SERVICE OF MOTION:

[X] Proof of Service Timely Filed (CRC 3.1300) OK

[X] Correct Address (CCP 1013, 1013a) OK

[X] 16/21 Day Lapse (CCP 12c and 1005 (b)) OK

SUMMARY OF COMPLAINT: Action for breach of contract.

REQUEST FOR RELIEF: Compel Plaintiff Makayla Hawkins to provide verified responses to Form Interrogatories, Set One and Milan Lacy to provide verified responses to Request for Production of Documents, Set One, without objections. Award Defendant sanctions of $1,061.65 per motion.

OPPOSITION: Filed July 13, 2022.

REPLY: None filed as of September 9, 2022.

ANALYSIS:

On February 28, 2022, Defendant Sonya Najera (erroneously sued as Sonya Moya) (“Defendant”) served Form Interrogatories, Set One and Request for Production of Documents, Set One, on Plaintiffs Makayla Hawkins and Milan Lacy, respectively. (Motions, Alban Decl., Exh. A.) After Plaintiffs Hawkins and Milan Lacy failed to serve responses, Defendant sought to meet and confer and extended the deadline to respond. (Id. at Exh. B.) Following Plaintiffs Hawkins and Milan Lacy’s continued failure to respond, Defendant filed the instant (1) Motion to Compel Responses to Form Interrogatories, Set One, and Request for Sanctions; and (2) Motion to Compel Responses to Request for Production of Documents, Set One, and Request for Sanctions. (Id. at ¶d.) Plaintiffs’ attorney filed opposition declarations on July 13, 2022 confirming Plaintiffs’ non-cooperation with discovery. (Opp., Yeager Decl.)

There is no requirement for a prior meet and confer effort before a motion to compel initial responses can be filed. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.290, 2031.300.) Further, the motion can be brought any time after the responding party fails to provide the responses. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.290, 2031.300.) Based on their failure to respond to the propounded discovery, Defendant is entitled to an order compelling Plaintiffs Hawkins and Milan Lacy to serve verified responses to the Form Interrogatories, Set One, and Request for Production of Documents, Set One, respectively, without objections.

Plaintiffs Hawkins and Milan Lacy’s failure to timely respond constitutes a misuse of the discovery process. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2023.010, subd. (d).) Sanctions are appropriate under Code of Civil Procedure sections 2023.010 and 2023.030 and have been properly noticed. However, the amount sought is excessive. Under a lodestar calculation, the request for sanctions is granted against each Plaintiff in the amount of $186.65 based on an hour of attorney time billed at $250.00 an hour, plus $61.65 in costs per motion. (Motion, Alban Decl., ¶e.)

Conclusion

Moving party to give notice.