Judge Melvin D. Sandvig, Case Number: 23CHCV03565, Date: 2025-03-20 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Melvin D. Sandvig, Case: 23CHCV03565, Date: 2025-03-20 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: 23CHCV03565 Hearing Date: March 20, 2025 Dept: F47

Dept. F47

Date: 3/20/25 TRIAL DATE: 1/26/26

Case #23CHCV03565

MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSES

(Special Interrogatories, Set 1)

Motion filed on 9/10/24.

MOVING PARTY: Defendant Magic Mountain LLC

RESPONDING PARTY: Plaintiff Genesis Mendez by and through her Guardian Ad Litem Vincent Allen

NOTICE: ok

RELIEF REQUESTED: An order compelling Plaintiff Genesis Mendez by and through her Guardian Ad Litem Vincent Allen to serve verified further responses to Defendant’s Special Interrogatories, Set 1, Nos. 5, 6 and 7 within 7 days from the date of the hearing on the motion. Additionally, Defendant seeks sanctions against Plaintiff and her attorneys of record, Ronnivashti Whitehead, Esq. from The Barnes Firm, L.C., jointly and severally, in the amount of $2,175.00.

RULING: The motion is granted.

SUMMARY OF FACTS & PROCEDURAL HISTORY

This action arises out of an incident that occurred on 1/17/22 at Defendant Magic Mountain LLC’s (Defendant) park. Plaintiff Genesis Menendez (Plaintiff) alleges that while at Defendant’s park on that day with friends she was ejected from the Gold Rusher roller coaster causing her to sustain severe injuries.

On 2/23/24, Defendant served Plaintiff with Special Interrogatories, Set 1, which included questions regarding the contact information for witnesses to the incident. (See Makorow Decl., Ex.A). On 4/25/24, Plaintiff responded to the interrogatories. (Id., Ex.B). On 6/10/24, Defendant’s counsel sent Plaintiff a meet and confer letter regarding her responses to Special Interrogatories Nos. 5, 6 and 7 which Defendant found to be deficient. (Id., Ex.C). On 7/12/24, Plaintiff provided further responses which Defendant still found to be deficient. (Id., Ex.D). On 7/23/24, Defendant’s counsel sent Plaintiff another meet and confer letter regarding the responses to Special Interrogatories Nos. 5, 6 and 7. (Id., Ex.E). On 8/9/24, Plaintiff provided further responses which were exactly the same as the previous responses. (Id., Ex.F). On 8/20/24, Defendant’s counsel sent another meet and confer letter regarding the discovery responses. (Id., Ex.G). On 8/23/24, Plaintiff responded indicating that no further responses would be provided. (Id., Ex.H).

On 9/10/24, Defendant filed and served the instant motion seeking an order compelling Plaintiff Genesis Mendez by and through her Guardian Ad Litem Vincent Allen (Plaintiff) to serve verified further responses to Defendant’s Special Interrogatories, Set 1, Nos. 5, 6 and 7 within 7 days from the date of the hearing on the motion. Additionally, Defendant seeks sanctions against Plaintiff and her attorneys of record, Ronnivashti Whitehead, Esq. from The Barnes Firm, L.C., jointly and severally, in the amount of $2,175.00. The motion was original set for hearing on 3/12/25. On 2/11/25, the Court continued the hearing on the motion to 3/20/25; however, the Court ordered that all oppositions and replies were due pursuant to the 3/12/25 hearing date. (See 2/11/25 Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order). On 3/5/25, Defendant filed and served a Notice of Non-Opposition to the motion. On 3/7/25, 6 days late pursuant to the original 3/12/25 hearing date, Plaintiff filed and served an opposition to the motion. See CCP 1005(b). On 3/12/25, Defendant filed and served a reply to the opposition. Despite the late filing and service of the opposition, the Court considered it in ruling on the merits of the motion. See CRC 3.1300(d).

ANALYSIS

A response to an interrogatory must be as complete and straightforward as the information reasonably available to the responding party permits. See CCP 2030.220(a).

CCP 2030.300(a) provides, in relevant part, that “[o]n receipt of a response to interrogatories, the propounding party may move for an order compelling a further response if the propounding party deems that any of the following apply: (1) An answer to a particular interrogatory is evasive or incomplete.”

The subject interrogatories ask Plaintiff to provide contact information for individuals: at the amusement park with Plaintiff when the incident occurred; on the Gold Rusher ride when Plaintiff was allegedly injure; and who Plaintiff believes witnessed the alleged incident. (See Makorow Decl., Ex.A, Special Interrogatories, Nos. 5, 6, 7). In response to the interrogatories, Plaintiff did not provide all of the information requested claiming that she did not know certain information regarding the individuals she attended the amusement park with on the date of the incident. (Id., Ex.B, D, F). However, Plaintiff’s testimony at her deposition on 2/13/25 shows that Plaintiff has or can obtain certain information, which was not provided, in response to the interrogatories. (See Makorow Reply Decl., Ex.A).

The opposition incorrectly claims that Defendant did not file a motion to compel further responses as required. Plaintiff argues that Defendant has not indicated that any of Plaintiff’s objections lack merit. Plaintiff did not interpose any objections in the responses to the specific interrogatories at issue. Rather, Plaintiff made general objections to all of the Special Interrogatories in Set 1. (See Makorow Decl., Ex.A). Plaintiff has failed to justify any of those objections as is her burden. See Fairmont Insurance Co. (2000) 22 C4th 245, 255; Coy (1962) 58 C2d 210, 220-221; Williams (2017) 3 C5th 531, 541-542.

The opposition then contends that there was no willful failure to respond by Plaintiff or her counsel. Although not entirely clear, it seems that Plaintiff’s counsel is contending that further responses could not be provided because counsel could not locate Plaintiff. (See Opposition, p.2:13-15, “There was no willful failure to respond to discovery by Plaintiff or her counsel. Plaintiff’s counsel diligently and persistently searched for Plaintiff to fulfill his discovery obligations.”; p.4:8-14, “Plaintiff became destitute during the pandemic and has not been able to maintain a regular address or telephone. Moreover, Plaintiff’s counsel has made extensive efforts to contact Plaintiff and has made every effort to substantially comply with all discovery requests. Plaintiff’s counsel cannot verify that Plaintiff received the discovery and consciously failed to respond. All evidence suggests that the noncompliance was involuntary.”; Whitehead Decl. ¶3). However, Plaintiff appeared for her deposition on 2/13/25, and indicated that she has or can obtain certain information responsive to the subject interrogatories. (See Makorow Reply Decl., Ex.A).

Defendant is entitled to an award of sanctions against Plaintiff and her counsel in the amount of $2,175.00 for their failure to comply with their discovery obligations. CCP 2030.300(d); (Makorow Decl. ¶13).

CONCLUSION

The motion is granted. Plaintiff Genesis Mendez by and through her Guardian Ad Litem Vincent Allen is ordered to provide further, verified responses to Special Interrogatories, Set 1, Nos. 5, 6 and 7, without objections, within 15 days. Additionally, sanctions are imposed against Plaintiff and her counsel of record, Ronnivashti Whitehead, Esq. from The Barnes Firm, L.C., jointly and severally, in the amount of $2,175.00. Sanctions are payable within 15 days.