Judge: Matthew C. Braner, Case: 37-2022-00016422-CU-WT-CTL, Date: 2023-08-11 Tentative Ruling

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,

DEPT.:

EVENT DATE:

EVENT TIME:

HALL OF JUSTICE

TENTATIVE RULINGS - August 10, 2023

08/11/2023  09:00:00 AM  C-60 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

JUDICIAL OFFICER:Matthew C. Braner

CASE NO.:

CASE CATEGORY:

EVENT TYPE:

CASE TITLE: CASE TYPE:

Civil - Unlimited  Wrongful Termination Discovery Hearing 37-2022-00016422-CU-WT-CTL ALCARAZ VS AQUI ES TEXCOCO INC [IMAGED] CAUSAL DOCUMENT/DATE FILED:

Plaintiff Victoria Alcaraz's unopposed motions to compel initial responses from Defendant Aqui Es Texcoco, Inc. to form interrogatories, special interrogatories, and requests for production are GRANTED.

Plaintiff's unopposed motion to compel the deposition of Defendant's person most knowledgeable is GRANTED.

Plaintiff's unopposed motion to have requests for admission to Defendant deemed admitted is GRANTED.

As of August 10, 2023, Defendant has not filed any oppositions to Plaintiff's motions. Pursuant to this court's local rules, this failure to respond may be regarded as a concession that Plaintiff's motions have merit. (See San Diego Superior Court Local Rule 2.1.19, subd. (B).) However, it cannot be deemed an admission that sanctions should be awarded. (CRC 3.1348, subd. (b).) Plaintiff's counsel attests that Defendant was properly served sets of form interrogatories, special interrogatories, and requests for production on September 26, 2022, but Defendant did not serve timely responses and still has not served responses. In the absence of timely responses to interrogatories and requests for production, objections are waived, including objections based on privilege. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.290, 2031.300.) Defendant has not provided any reason for refusing to respond to Plaintiff's discovery requests. Therefore, Defendant will be compelled to respond to Plaintiffs' form interrogatories (set one), special interrogatories (set one), and requests for production (set one), and any objections raised by Defendant are considered waived.

Plaintiff's counsel also attests that Defendant was properly served with a PMK deposition notice for a deposition set for November 17, 2023, but Defendant did not appear. Defendant did not object to nor notify Plaintiff it would not appear. There is no evidence to indicate Defendants cannot appear for depositions. Plaintiff's motion was unopposed; there does not appear to be any substantial justification for Plaintiff's failure to appear. Accordingly, Plaintiff's motion to compel the deposition of Defendant's PMK is granted.

The court denies the request for sanctions with respect to the previously discussed motions. Defendant did not oppose the motions or move to quash the deposition notice; thus, mandatory sanctions do not apply. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2025.410(d), 2030.290(c), 2031.300(c).) The court is not inclined to award discretionary sanctions for misuse of the discovery process, given the long delay in moving to compel Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

2970540  14 CASE NUMBER: CASE TITLE:  ALCARAZ VS AQUI ES TEXCOCO INC [IMAGED]  37-2022-00016422-CU-WT-CTL Defendant's compliance and Plaintiff's decision not to meet and confer on the issues before filing her motions. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2023.010(d), 2023.030(a).) Code of Civil Procedure section 2025.430 also does not apply, as Defendant was not the noticing party.

As to the motion to have the requests for admission deemed admitted, Plaintiff's counsel attests Plaintiff propounded the requests on Defendant on September 26, 2022; as of the filing of Plaintiff's motion, no responses have been received. Accordingly, the court must grant Plaintiff's motion, and it must impose a monetary sanction on Defendant. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.280, subd. (c).) Plaintiff requests a sanction of $2060, reduced from $3560 for 5 hours of attorney time at $700 per hour plus a $60 filing fee. Both the estimated hours and the proposed fee rate are unreasonable. The court believes a rate of $450 per hour is more appropriate, and considering that no opposition or reply was filed, 2 hours of work time is more in line with this kind of simple, straightforward motion. The court will therefore impose a sanction of $960 on Defendant and his counsel of record.

Plaintiff's Requests for Admissions, Set One, are deemed admitted against Defendant Aqui Es Texcoco, Inc. Defendant and its counsel of record are ordered to pay monetary sanctions to Plaintiff in the amount of $960.00 by September 8, 2023.

Defendant's PMK is ordered to sit for deposition no later than September 8, 2023.

Defendant is compelled to provide verified responses to Plaintiff's form interrogatories (set one), special interrogatories (set one), and requests for production (set one), no later than September 8, 2023.

The minute order is the order of the court.

Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

2970540  14