Judge: Melvin D. Sandvig, Case: 21STCV21293, Date: 2022-10-17 Tentative Ruling

Counsel wishing to submit on a tentative ruling may inform the clerk or courtroom assisant in North Valley Department F47, 9425 Penfield Ave., Chatsworth, CA 91311, at (818) 407-2247.  Please be aware that unless all parties submit, the matter will still be called for hearing and may be argued by any appearing/non-submitting parties. If the matter is submitted on the court's tentative ruling by all parties, counsel for moving party shall give notice of ruling. This may be done by incorporating verbatim the court's tentative ruling. The tentative ruling may be extracted verbatim by copying and specially pasting, as unformatted text, from the Los Angeles Superior Court’s website, http://www.lasuperiorcourt.org. All hearings on law and motion and other calendar matters are generally NOT transcribed by a court reporter unless one is provided by the party(ies).

Case Number: 21STCV21293    Hearing Date: October 17, 2022    Dept: F47

Dept. F47

Date: 10/17/22                                                               TRIAL DATE: 6/19/23

Case #21STCV21293

MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSES

(Form Interrogatories, Set 1)

Motion filed on 3/17/22.

MOVING PARTY: Defendant Right  Choice In-Home Care, Inc.

RESPONDING PARTY: Plaintiff Phyllis Ginolfi

NOTICE: ok

RELIEF REQUESTED: An order compelling Plaintiff to serve further responses to Form Interrogatories, Set 1, numbers 2.12, 6.3, 6.4, 6.6, 6.7, 9.1, 12.1, 12.3 and 12.6.  Additionally, Defendant requests sanctions against Plaintiff in the amount of $1,761.00.

RULING: The motion is granted as set forth below.  Further responses are due and sanctions are payable within 20 days.  

This action arises out of Plaintiff Phyllis Ginolfi’s (Plaintiff) claim that she was dropped or fell while she was a resident of Defendant Right Choice In-Home Care, Inc.’s (Defendant) facility.   

Plaintiff alleges Defendant’s negligence caused her injuries and damages.  On 6/7/21, Plaintiff filed this action against Defendant Right Choice In-Home Care, Inc. and Defendant HDL, Inc. dba Pacoima Adult Day Care for: (1) Dependent Adult/Elder Abuse and (2) Negligence.  Defendant filed its Answer on 8/31/21.

On 9/27/21, Defendant served the subject discovery on Plaintiff.  (Diaz Decl.).  Plaintiff failed to timely respond.  Id.  After meet and confer efforts, Plaintiff served responses, by email, on 1/31/22.  Id.  Defendant found certain responses to be deficient.  Id.  On 2/25/22, Defendant sent Plaintiff a meet and confer letter which requested further responses by 3/4/22. Id.  Plaintiff failed to serve further responses as requested; therefore, on 3/9/22, Defendant sent a follow-up meet and confer letter which went unanswered.  Id.  On 3/11/22, Defendant’s counsel called Plaintiff’s counsel regarding the deficient responses and left a voicemail regarding the deficient responses.  Id.  Again, no response was received from Plaintiff’s counsel.   

On 3/17/22, 45 days after the service of the responses, Defendant timely filed and served the instant motion seeking an order compelling Plaintiff to serve further responses to Form Interrogatories, Set 1, numbers 2.12, 6.3, 6.4, 6.6, 6.7, 9.1, 12.1, 12.3 and 12.6.  Additionally, Defendant requests sanctions against Plaintiff in the amount of $1,761.00.

The motion was originally set for hearing on 5/2//22 when the case was pending in Dept. 32.  After the case was transferred to Dept. F47, the hearing on the motion was rescheduled for 10/17/22.  Plaintiff has not opposed the motion or filed any response to the motion.   

Upon receipt of responses to interrogatories, the propounding party may move for an order compelling further responses if the propounding party deems that an answer is evasive or incomplete.  CCP 2030.300(a). 

Plaintiff’s responses to Form Interrogatories numbers 2.12, 6.3, 6.4, 6.6, 6.7, 9.1, 12.1, 12.3 are evasive and/or incomplete. 

Defendant is entitled to an award of sanctions against Plaintiff for her failure to comply with her discovery obligations.  CCP 2023.010(h), (i); CCP 2023.030; 2030.300(d).  However, the sanctions requested, $1,761.00, are reduced to $872.00 (2.4 hours for  meet and confer and motion preparation + 40 minutes to prepare and appear at hearing multiplied by $265/hour + $60 filing fee).

 Dept. F47

Date: 10/17/22                                                               TRIAL DATE: 6/19/23

Case #21STCV21293

MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSES

(Request for Production of Documents, Set 1)

Motion filed on 3/17/22.

MOVING PARTY: Defendant Right  Choice In-Home Care, Inc.

RESPONDING PARTY: Plaintiff Phyllis Ginolfi

NOTICE: ok

RELIEF REQUESTED: An order compelling Plaintiff to serve further responses to Request for Production of Documents, Set 1, numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7 and 8.  Additionally, Defendant requests sanctions against Plaintiff in the amount of $1,761.00.

RULING: The motion is granted as set forth below.  Further responses are due and sanctions are payable within 20 days.  

This action arises out of Plaintiff Phyllis Ginolfi’s (Plaintiff) claim that she was dropped or fell while she was a resident of Defendant Right Choice In-Home Care, Inc.’s (Defendant) facility.   

Plaintiff alleges Defendant’s negligence caused her injuries and damages.  On 6/7/21, Plaintiff filed this action against Defendant Right Choice In-Home Care, Inc. and Defendant HDL, Inc. dba Pacoima Adult Day Care for: (1) Dependent Adult/Elder Abuse and (2) Negligence.  Defendant filed its Answer on 8/31/21.

On 9/27/21, Defendant served the subject discovery on Plaintiff.  (Diaz Decl.).  Plaintiff failed to timely respond.  Id.  After meet and confer efforts, Plaintiff served responses, by email, on 1/31/22.  (Id.; Nguyen Decl.).  Defendant found certain responses to be deficient.  Id.  On 2/25/22, Defendant sent Plaintiff a meet and confer letter which requested further responses by 3/4/22. Id.  Plaintiff failed to serve further responses as requested; therefore, on 3/9/22, Defendant sent a follow-up meet and confer letter which went unanswered.  Id.  On 3/11/22, Defendant’s counsel called Plaintiff’s counsel regarding the deficient responses and left a voicemail regarding the deficient responses.  Id.  Again, no response was received from Plaintiff’s counsel.   

On 3/17/22, 45 days after the service of the responses, Defendant timely filed and served the instant motion seeking an order compelling Plaintiff to serve further responses to Request for Production of Documents, Set 1, numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7 and 8.  Additionally, Defendant requests sanctions against Plaintiff in the amount of $1,761.00.

The motion was originally set for hearing on 6/1/22 when the case was pending in Dept. 32.  After the case was transferred to Dept. F47, the hearing on the motion was rescheduled for 10/17/22.  Plaintiff has not opposed the motion or filed any response to the motion.   

Upon receipt of responses to a demand for inspection, the demanding party may move for an order compelling further responses if: (1) a statement of compliance is incomplete, (2) a representation of inability to comply is inadequate, incomplete or evasive and/or (3) and objection in the response is without merit or too general.  CCP 2031.310(a). 

Plaintiff’s responses to Request for Production numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7 and 8 are evasive, incomplete and/or non-responsive. 

Defendant is entitled to an award of sanctions against Plaintiff for her failure to comply with her discovery obligations.  CCP 2023.010(h), (i); CCP 2023.030; 2031.310(h).  However, the sanctions requested, $1,761.00, are reduced to $872.00 (2.4 hours for  meet and confer and motion preparation + 40 minutes to prepare and appear at hearing multiplied by $265/hour + $60 filing fee).

 Dept. F47

Date: 10/17/22                                                               TRIAL DATE: 6/19/23

Case #21STCV21293

MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSES

(Special Interrogatories, Set 1)

Motion filed on 3/17/22.

MOVING PARTY: Defendant Right  Choice In-Home Care, Inc.

RESPONDING PARTY: Plaintiff Phyllis Ginolfi

NOTICE: ok

RELIEF REQUESTED: An order compelling Plaintiff to serve further responses to Special Interrogatories, Set 1, numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 19, 23, 25 and 26.  Additionally, Defendant requests sanctions against Plaintiff in the amount of $1,761.00.

RULING:

This action arises out of Plaintiff Phyllis Ginolfi’s (Plaintiff) claim that she was dropped or fell while she was a resident of Defendant Right Choice In-Home Care, Inc.’s (Defendant) facility.   

Plaintiff alleges Defendant’s negligence caused her injuries and damages.  On 6/7/21, Plaintiff filed this action against Defendant Right Choice In-Home Care, Inc. and Defendant HDL, Inc. dba Pacoima Adult Day Care for: (1) Dependent Adult/Elder Abuse and (2) Negligence.  Defendant filed its Answer on 8/31/21.

On 9/27/21, Defendant served the subject discovery on Plaintiff.  (Diaz Decl.).  Plaintiff failed to timely respond.  Id.  After meet and confer efforts, Plaintiff served responses, by email, on 1/31/22.  Id.  Defendant found certain responses to be deficient.  Id.  On 2/25/22, Defendant sent Plaintiff a meet and confer letter which requested further responses by 3/4/22. Id.  Plaintiff failed to serve further responses as requested; therefore, on 3/9/22, Defendant sent a follow-up meet and confer letter which went unanswered.  Id.  On 3/11/22, Defendant’s counsel called Plaintiff’s counsel regarding the deficient responses and left a voicemail regarding the deficient responses.  Id.  Again, no response was received from Plaintiff’s counsel.   

On 3/17/22, 45 days after the service of the responses, Defendant filed and served the instant motion seeking an order compelling Plaintiff to serve further responses to Special Interrogatories, Set 1, numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 19, 23, 25 and 26.  Additionally, Defendant requests sanctions against Plaintiff in the amount of $1,761.00.  However, Plaintiff failed to file a declaration in support of the instant motion.  (See below).     

The motion was originally set for hearing on 6/1/22 when the case was pending in Dept. 32.  After the case was transferred to Dept. F47, the hearing on the motion was rescheduled for 10/17/22.  Plaintiff has not opposed the motion or filed any response to the motion.   

Upon receipt of responses to interrogatories, the propounding party may move for an order compelling further responses if the propounding party deems that an answer is evasive or incomplete.  CCP 2030.300(a). 

Based on the separate statement filed in support of the motion, Plaintiff’s responses to Special Interrogatories numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 19, 23, 25 and 26 appear to be  evasive and/or incomplete.  Additionally, with regard to responses to certain Special Interrogatories (numbers 4, 10, 14, 17, 23, 26), Plaintiff references attached documents without referring to CCP 2030.230 and after having served untimely responses which precludes her from invoking CCP 2030.230.  However, Defendant has failed to file a declaration in support of the motion to compel further responses regarding Special Interrogatories, Set 1.  Instead, Defendant filed two declarations in support of the motion to compel further responses to Request for Production of Documents, Set 1. 

If Defendant timely served a declaration in support of the motion to compel further responses to Special Interrogatories, Set 1, and merely mistakenly filed the declaration regarding the document requests twice, Defendant is ordered to file the declaration in support of the motion to compel further responses to special interrogatories with proof that the declaration was timely served on Plaintiff, by noon on 10/17/22.  The Court will take the matter under submission in order to review such declaration and supporting evidence.  If Defendant did not timely serve a declaration in support of the instant motion, the motion will be denied as all papers in support of the motion were not timely served as required.  See CCP 2030.300(c); CCP 1005(b).