Judge: Mark E. Windham, Case: 22STLC07037, Date: 2023-04-18 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 22STLC07037 Hearing Date: April 18, 2023 Dept: 26
MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO INTERROGATORIES;
REQUEST
FOR SANCTIONS
(CCP
§§ 2030.290, 2023.010)
TENTATIVE RULING:
Defendant Raymont H. Johnson, Jr.,
DDS’s (1) Motion to Compel Responses to Form Interrogatories, Set One; and
Request for Sanctions; (2) Motion to Compel Responses to Special
Interrogatories, Set One; Request for Sanctions; and (3) Motion to Compel
Responses to Demand for Identification and Inspection of Documents, Set One,
and Request for Sanctions, are GRANTED.
PLAINTIFF DANA MOORE IS TO SERVE
VERIFIED RESPONSES TO THE DISCOVERY REQUESTS WITHOUT OBJECTIONS WITHIN 20 DAYS’
SERVICE OF THIS ORDER. PLAINTIFF IS FURTHER ORDERED TO PAY SANCTIONS OF $795.00 TO DEFENSE COUNSEL WITHIN 20 DAYS’
SERVICE OF THIS ORDER.
ANALYSIS:
On November 16, 2022, Defendant Raymont H. Johnson, Jr., DDS
(“Defendant Johnson”) (erroneously sued as “Raymond Johnson, DDS”) served Form
Interrogatories, Set One, Special Interrogatories, Set One, and Request for
Identification and Production of Documents, Set One, on Plaintiff Dana Moore
(“Plaintiff”). (Motions, Aloia Decl.,
Exh. A.) Despite a meet and confer effort extending the deadline to respond to
the requests, Plaintiff has not served responses. (Id. at ¶4 and Exh.
B.) On December 29, 2022, Defendant Johnson filed the instant (1) Motion to Compel
Responses to Form Interrogatories, Set One; and Request for Sanctions; (2)
Motion to Compel Responses to Special Interrogatories, Set One; Request for
Sanctions; and (3) Motion to Compel Responses to Demand for Identification and
Inspection of Documents, Set One, and Request for Sanctions.
The Motions initially came for hearing on February 1 and 2,
2023 at which time both parties appeared. (Minute Order, 02/01/23.) At
Defendant’s request, the Court continued the hearing on the Motions to March 2,
2023. (Ibid.) Plaintiff filed an opposition on February 23, 2023. The
hearing was continued on the Court’s own motion to April 17, 2023. To date, no
opposition has been filed.
Discussion
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 Plaintiff’s failure to respond to the propounded discovery, Defendant
is entitled to an order compelling them to serve verified responses to the discovery
requests without objections. Plaintiff’s opposition provides no legal basis to
deny the requested relief.
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 awarded in the amount of $795.00 based on
three hours of attorney time billed at $225.00 per hour, and $60.00 in costs
per motion. (Motions, Aloia
Decl., ¶8.)
Conclusion
Defendant Raymont H. Johnson, Jr.,
DDS’s (1) Motion to Compel Responses to Form Interrogatories, Set One; and
Request for Sanctions; (2) Motion to Compel Responses to Special
Interrogatories, Set One; Request for Sanctions; and (3) Motion to Compel
Responses to Demand for Identification and Inspection of Documents, Set One,
and Request for Sanctions, are GRANTED.
PLAINTIFF DANA MOORE IS TO SERVE
VERIFIED RESPONSES TO THE DISCOVERY REQUESTS WITHOUT OBJECTIONS WITHIN 20 DAYS’
SERVICE OF THIS ORDER. PLAINTIFF IS FURTHER ORDERED TO PAY SANCTIONS OF $795.00 TO DEFENSE COUNSEL WITHIN 20 DAYS’
SERVICE OF THIS ORDER.
Moving party to give notice.