Judge Mark E. Windham, Case 21STCV23896 2023-03-20 Tentative Ruling

If you desire to submit on the tentative ruling, you may do so by e-mailing Dept. 26 at the Spring Street Courthouse until the morning of the motion hearing.

The e-mail address is SSCdept26@lacourt.org

The heading on your e-mail should contain the case name, number, hearing date, and that you submit. The message should indicate your name, contact information, and the party you represent. Please note, the above e-mail address is to inform the court of your submission on the tentative ruling. All other inquiries will not receive a response.

If there are no appearances by either side and no submission on the Court's tentative ruling, the matter will be placed OFF CALENDAR.

Due to overcrowding concerns of COVID-19, all parties shall make every effort to schedule a remote appearance via LACourtConnect (https://my.lacourt.org/laccwelcome) for their next hearing. The parties shall register with LACourtConnect at least 2 hours prior to their scheduled hearing time.

Guerrero v. City of Los Angeles, et al.
MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS AND REQUEST FOR MONETARY SANCTIONS

Defendant City of Los Angeles’ Motion to Compel Discovery Responses and Request for Sanctions is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE IN PART. PLAINTIFF GUADALUPE GUERRERO IS ORDERED SERVE RESPONSES WITHOUT OBJECTIONS TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE AND REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION, SET ONE, WITHIN 20 DAYS’ SERVICE OF THIS ORDER. PLAINTIFF IS ALSO ORDERED TO PAY SANCTIONS OF $365.00 TO DEFENSE COUNSEL WITHIN 20 DAYS’ SERVICE OF THIS ORDER.

THE REQUEST TO COMPEL PLAINTIFF’S RESPONSES TO FORM INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE, IS DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

On November 28, 2022, Defendant City of Los Angeles (“Defendant”) served Form Interrogatories, Set One, Special Interrogatories, Set One, and Request For Production of Documents, Set One, on Plaintiff Guadalupe Guerrero (“Plaintiff”). (Motion, Quach Decl., Exhs. A-C.) Despite a meet and confer effort, Plaintiff has not served responses to the discovery requests. (Id. at ¶¶4-5 and Exh. B.) Defendant filed the instant Motion to Compel Discovery Responses and Request for Sanctions on February 17, 2023. No opposition has been filed to date.

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 the failure to respond to the propounded discovery, Defendant is entitled to an order compelling Plaintiff to serve verified responses to the Request for Production of Documents, Set One and Special Interrogatories, Set One, without objections. The Form Interrogatories, Set One, propounded on Plaintiff, includes sub-parts in violation of Code of Civil Procedure section 94, subdivision (a)(1). Accordingly, Defendant’s request to compel Plaintiff’s responses to Form Interrogatories, Set One, is denied without prejudice.

Plaintiff’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. Sanctions are granted against Plaintiff in the amount of $365.00 based on one hour of attorney time billed at $365.00 an hour. (Motion, Quach Decl., ¶6.)

THE REQUEST TO COMPEL PLAINTIFF’S RESPONSES TO FORM INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE, IS DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.