Judge: Martha K. Gooding, Case: 21-01223241, Date: 2023-08-07 Tentative Ruling

Motion to Compel Further Responses to Special Interrogatories – CONTINUED TO 9/11/2023 at 1:30 p.m.

Plaintiff Benito Bello Leon (“Plaintiff”) seeks an order compelling Defendant Panda Motors, Inc. (“Defendant”) to provide further responses to Plaintiff’s Special Interrogatory numbers 1-25.  For the reasons set forth below, the Motion is CONTINUED.

Plaintiff served the notice of motion and supporting papers by mail and electronic service only on Panda Motors.  There is no proof of service showing Plaintiff served the other parties who have appeared.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 1014 [After a defendant appears, that “defendant or the defendant’s attorney is entitled to notice of all subsequent proceedings of which notice is required to be given. Where a defendant has not appeared, service of notice or papers need not be made upon the defendant.”]; (Weil & Brown, Cal. Practice Guide: Civil Procedure Before Trial (The Rutter Group 2023) ¶ 9:82.5 [“The moving papers must be served on all parties who have appeared in the action, whether or not the motion seeks relief against such parties.”].) 

In addition, the proof of service is defective for other reasons. 

First, Plaintiff’s proof of service did not include the server’s email address.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 1013b, subd. (b)(1).) 

Second, the proof of service did not comply with CCP section 1013a, which requires the proof of service to state, among other things, that the server “is a resident of or employed in the county where the mailing occurs,” “the date and place of deposit in the mail,” and that “the envelope was sealed and deposited in the mail with the postage thereon fully prepaid.”  (Code Civ. Proc., § 1013a, subd. (1).)  “In making service by mail there must be a strict compliance with sections 1012, 1013 and 1013a.”  (Forslund v. Forslund (1964) 225 Cal.App.2d 476, 485.) 

Unless Plaintiff can show the notice of hearing and moving papers were properly served on all parties that have appeared, Plaintiff’s unopposed motion will be denied.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.300, subd. (c); Sexton v. Superior Court (1997) 58 Cal.App.4th 1403, 1410.) 

The Court continues the hearing on this Motion to September 11, 2023, at 1:30 p.m. to permit Plaintiff to (1) ensure that it has properly served the moving papers and (2) file a proper proof of service that fully complies with the Code.  No further or additional briefing will be permitted; the continuance of the hearing is only to permit proper service of the moving papers and filing of proof thereof.

Plaintiff is ordered to give notice.