Judge: Melvin D. Sandvig, Case: 23CHCV03485, Date: 2025-06-02 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 23CHCV03485 Hearing Date: June 2, 2025 Dept: F47
Dept. F47
Date: 6/2/25
TRIAL DATE: 3/2/26
Case #23CHCV03485
MOTION TO
COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSES
(Special
Interrogatories, Set 1)
Motion filed on 3/27/25.
MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff Katherine Massa
RESPONDING PARTY: Defendant Canyon Sierra Properties, LLC
NOTICE: ok
RULING: The hearing on the motion will be
continued.
SUMMARY OF FACTS & PROCEDURAL HISTORY
This action arises out of a slip and fall incident that
occurred on 12/31/21 on the balcony of Plaintiff Katherine Massa’s (Plaintiff) apartment
which was allegedly owned, occupied, operated, built, engineered, contracted,
leased, rented, inspected, managed, controlled, repaired, cleaned, maintained
by Defendant Canyon Sierra Properties, LLC (Defendant).
On 11/14/23, Plaintiff filed this action against
Defendant for premises liability and negligence. On 9/3/24, Defendant answered the
complaint. On 9/25/24, Plaintiff served
Defendant with Special Interrogatories, Set 1.
(Hartsfield Decl., Ex.A).
Plaintiff granted Defendant an extension to respond to the discovery
until 11/22/24. Id. On 11/22/24, Defendant served responses and
on 1/29/25, Defendant served verifications for the responses. (Id., Ex.B).
Plaintiff found certain of the responses to the discovery
to be deficient and attempted to meet and confer regarding same. (Id., Ex.C). Plaintiff contends that Defendant’s counsel
agreed to provide further responses by 3/21/25 and granted an extension to file
and serve the instant motion until 3/28/25.
(Id., Ex.D – NO EXHIBIT D IS ATTACHED). Defendant did not provide further
responses. Id.
Therefore, on 3/27/25, Plaintiff filed and served the
instant motion seeking an order compelling Defendant to provide further
verified responses to Plaintiff’s Special Interrogatories, Set 1, numbers 2, 4,
5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 26, 27, 40, 41, 42, 43, 47, 50,
54, 57, 58, 59, 64, and 65.
Additionally, Plaintiff requests an order imposing sanctions in the
amount of $2,200.00 against Defendant and their counsel of record, Jane
Kupperman. Defendant has not opposed or
otherwise responded to the motion.
ANALYSIS
CCP 2030.300(c) provides:
“Unless notice of this motion is
given within 45 days of the service of the verified response, or any
supplemental verified response, or on or before any specific later date to
which the propounding party and the responding party have agreed in writing,
the propounding party waives any right to compel a further response to the
interrogatories.”
(emphasis added)
Although Plaintiff’s counsel claims that Defendant’s
counsel agreed to extend the deadline to file the instant motion until 3/28/25,
Exhibit D which includes the purported written agreement is not included in the
motion. (See Hartsfield Decl. ¶5,
Ex.D – NOTHING IS ATTACHED TO EXHIBIT D).
The hearing on the motion will be continued to allow
Plaintiff to provide evidence to support counsel’s contention that defense
counsel agreed in writing to extend the deadline to file the instant motion
until 3/28/25.
CONCLUSION
The hearing on the motion will be continued. In addition to providing the Court with the
missing Exhibit D, Plaintiff’s counsel is ordered to resubmit the motion with
the exhibits attached thereto electronically bookmarked as required by CRC
3.1110(f)(4). The additional/amended
documents must be filed and served at least 16 court days before the continued
hearing date.
Counsel for the parties are warned that failure to
electronically bookmark exhibits in the future as required may result in matters
being continued so that papers can be resubmitted in compliance, papers not
being considered and/or the imposition of sanctions.