Judge: Martha K. Gooding, Case: 2020-01129890, Date: 2022-08-29 Tentative Ruling

1)  Motion to Compel Further Responses to Form Interrogatories

2)  Motion to Compel Further Responses to Special Interrogatories

Plaintiff Michael P. Farah’s unopposed motion to compel Defendant Mitchell Zogob’s further responses to form interrogatories as well as his verifications to same, and Defendant’s verifications to his responses to requests for admission is continued to October 24, 2021 at 1:30 p.m.

Plaintiff Michael P. Farah’s unopposed motion to compel Defendant Mitchell Zogob’s further responses to special interrogatories as well as his verifications to same, and Defendant’s verifications to his responses to requests for production of documents is also continued to October 324, 2021 at 1:30 p.m.

The proofs of service are defective. First, they state that “On June 7, 2021, I served the following document(s): DEFENDANT USA NATIONAL TITLE COMPANY, INC.’S….”  This does not relate to the motion papers at issue here.

Also, the motions were e-served.  However, the sender’s email address was not included in the proof of service as required by Code Civ. Proc., § 1013b(b)(1), which provides that proof of electronic service shall include “[t]he electronic service address and the residence of business address of the person making the electronic service.” 

Furthermore, e-service is generally not authorized on pro per litigants. Self-represented parties must affirmatively consent to electronic service by serving and filing a notice so stating. (CRC, Rule 2.251(c)(3)(B).)  There is no indication Defendant has done so.

As a result, Plaintiff is ordered to file amended proofs of service showing service that is compliant with the California Rules of Court and Code of Civil Procedure, no later than 5 court days before the continued hearing date.

In addition, there is a problem with the evidence that was filed in support of the motions.

Counsel’s declarations purport to attach the discovery responses that are at issue, but none are actually attached. Only emails from Defendant are included.  (ROA 268, Vinci Decl. ¶¶ 8-9, Exs. I, J; ROA 269, Vinci Decl., ¶ 10, Exs. J, K.) 

Counsel is therefore also ordered to file amended declarations in support of the motions that include copies of the discovery responses that are at issue, no later than 5 court days before the continued hearing date.

Plaintiff Michael P. Farah is ordered to give notice of this ruling.