Judge: Mark E. Windham, Case: 21STLC05153, Date: 2023-11-22 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STLC05153    Hearing Date: November 22, 2023    Dept: 26

Storey v. Mandry, et al.

MOTIONS TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSES TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS; REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS

(CCP § 2031.310)

TENTATIVE RULING:

Defendant Christopher R. Mandry’s Motion to Motion to Compel Further Responses to Request for Production of Documents, and Request for Sanctions is CONTINUED TO JANUARY 10, 2024 AT 10:00 AM IN DEPARTMENT 26 IN THE SPRING STREET COURTHOUSE. BY DECEMBER 13, 2023, DEFENDANT IS TO FILE AND SERVE PAPERS CORRECTING THE DEFECTS NOTED HEREIN.

ANALYSIS:

Plaintiff Stephanie Storey (“Plaintiff”) filed the instant action for motor vehicle negligence against Defendant Christopher R. Mandry (“Defendant”) on July 13, 2021. Defendant filed an answer on March 9, 2022. On October 26, 2023, Plaintiff filed the instant Motion to Compel Further Responses to Request for Production of Documents, and Request for Sanctions, against Defendant. No opposition has been filed to date. Plaintiff filed a reply and notice of non-opposition on November 14, 2023.

Discussion

Procedural Requirements

Notice of the motion to compel further must be given “within 45 days of service of the verified response, or any supplemental verified response, or any specific later date to which the requesting party and the responding party have agreed in writing,” otherwise, the propounding party waives any right to compel a further response. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.310, subd. (c).) Plaintiff served responses to the Request for Production of Documents, Set One on August 9, 2023. (Motion, Carlson Decl., Exh. 2.) Following a meet and confer effort, Defendant gave Plaintiff an extension to serve responses until September 22, 2023 but none were served on that date. (Id. at ¶¶8-9.) The instant Motion was filed and served on October 26, 2023, which was 78 days after service of the responses. It is not clear if the parties agreed in writing to an extension of the time for Defendant to bring the instant Motion. Defendant must provide evidence of such a written agreement before the Court can grant the Motion.

Also, Cal. Rules of Court Rule 3.1345 requires all motions or responses involving further discovery contain a separate statement with the text of each request, the response, and a statement of factual and legal reasons for compelling further responses. (Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 3.1345, subd. (a).) Alternatively, “the court may allow the moving party to submit a concise outline of the discovery request and each response in dispute.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.300, subd. (b)(2).) The Motion is not accompanied by a separate statement. Defendant must file and serve a separate statement as mandated by the Rules of Court.

Finally, the Motion must be accompanied by a meet-and-confer declaration. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.300, subd. (b)(1).) Defense counsel sent meet-and-confer letters from July through September 2023 regarding Plaintiff’s responses to the subject requests but the parties were unable to reach a resolution. (Motion, Carlson Decl., ¶¶3-9.) The meet and confer requirement is satisfied.

Conclusion

Based on the foregoing, Defendant Christopher R. Mandry’s Motion to Motion to Compel Further Responses to Requests for Production of Documents, and Request for Sanctions is CONTINUED TO JANUARY 10, 2024 AT 10:00 AM IN DEPARTMENT 26 IN THE SPRING STREET COURTHOUSE. BY DECEMBER 13, 2023, DEFENDANT IS TO FILE AND SERVE PAPERS CORRECTING THE DEFECTS NOTED HEREIN.

Moving party to give notice.