Judge: Michael E. Whitaker, Case: 19STCV29749, Date: 2023-02-09 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 19STCV29749    Hearing Date: February 9, 2023    Dept: 32

PLEASE NOTE:   Parties are encouraged to meet and confer concerning this tentative ruling to determine if a resolution may be reached.  If the parties are unable to reach a resolution and a party intends to submit on this tentative ruling, the party must send an email to the Court at sscdept32@lacourt.org indicating that party’s intention to submit.  The email shall include the case number, date and time of the hearing, counsel’s contact information (if applicable), and the identity of the party submitting on this tentative ruling.  If the Court does not receive an email indicating the parties are submitting on this tentative ruling and there are no appearances at the hearing, the Court may place the motion off calendar or adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the Court.  If all parties do not submit on this tentative ruling, they should arrange to appear in-person or remotely (which is highly encouraged).  Further, after the Court has posted/issued a tentative ruling, the Court has the inherent authority to prohibit the withdrawal of the subject motion and adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the Court. 

TENTATIVE RULING

MOTION

Defendant Susanne Reutimann (“Defendant”) moves to compel Codefendant Beven & Brock Property Management Company, Inc.’s (Codefendant) verified responses, without objections, to Defendant’s:

1. Form Interrogatories, Set One, within 20 days of the hearing on this matter pursuant to CCP §§ 2023.010 and 2030.290; 

    

2. Special Interrogatories, Set One, within 20 days of the hearing on this matter pursuant to CCP §§ 2023.010 and 2030.290; and 

    

3. Demand for Inspection and Copying of Documents, Set One, within 20 days of the hearing on this matter pursuant to CCP §§ 2023.010 and 2031.300.

    

            Defendant does not request sanctions.  Codefendant has not filed oppositions. 

ANALYSIS

1. Form/Special Interrogatories

            “Within 30 days after service of interrogatories, the party to whom the interrogatories are propounded shall serve the original of the response to them on the propounding party . . . .” (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.260, subd. (a).)  The propounding party on a set of interrogatories may agree to extend the time for service beyond that 30 days.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.270.)  If the propounded party does not respond in the appropriate amount of time, the propounding party may move for an order to compel responses.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.290, subd. (b).)  Where a party fails to timely provide a response to interrogatories, the propounding party may compel a response to its interrogatories, . . .  , without need to meet and confer with opposing counsel.¿¿(Sinaiko Healthcare Consulting, Inc. v. Pacific Healthcare Consultants¿(2007) 148 Cal.App.4th 390, 404.)  Further, “[t]he party to whom the interrogatories are directed waives . . . any¿objection¿to the interrogatories, including one based on privilege or on the protection for work product . . .¿.”  (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.290.) ¿ ¿ 

            Here, Defendant properly served the Form Interrogatories, Set One, on Codefendant on or about May 26, 2022.  (Motion 6502, Declaration of Baurac ¶¶ 5-6; Exhibit “A”.)  Responses were due by June 25, 2022.  At no time did Codefendant request an extension to respond to the subject discovery or file a protective order .  (Motion 6502, Baurac Decl., ¶¶ 7-8.)  To date, Codefendant has not provided any response to the subject Form Interrogatories, Set One.  (Motion 6502, Baurac Decl., ¶ 9.) 

            Further, on or about May 26, 2022, Defendant properly served the Special Interrogatories, Set One, on Codefendant.  (Motion 1684, Baurac Decl., ¶¶ 5-6; Exhibit “A”.)  Responses were due by June 25, 2022.  At no time did Codefendant request an extension to respond to the subject discovery or file a protective order .  (Motion 1684, Baurac Decl., ¶¶ 7-8.)  To date, Codefendant has not provided any response to the subject Special Interrogatories, Set One.  (Motion 1684, Baurac Decl., ¶ 9.) 

          Considering the foregoing, the Court grants Defendant’s motions pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 2030.290 and orders Codefendant to provide verified responses, without objections, to Form Interrogatories, Set One and Special Interrogatories, Set One

1. Requests for Production

         “Within 30 days after service of a demand for inspection, copying, testing, or sampling, the party to whom the demand is directed shall serve the original of the response to it on the party making the demand . . . .”  (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.260, subd. (a).)  The party demanding inspection, copying, testing, or sampling and the responding party may agree to extend the time for service beyond that 30 days. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.270.)  The demanding party may seek an order compelling a response when there has not been a timely response to the request for production. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.300.)  Further, “[t]he party to whom the demand…is directed waives any objection to the demand, including one based on privilege or on the protection of work product . . . .” (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.300).)

            Here, on or about May 26, 2022, Defendant properly served the Demand for Inspection and Copying of Documents, Set One, on Codefendant.  (Motion 2788, Baurac Decl., ¶¶ 5-6; Exhibit “A”.)  Responses were due by June 25, 2022.  At no time did Codefendant request an extension to respond to the subject discovery or file a protective order .  (Motion 2788, Baurac Decl., ¶¶ 7-8.)  To date, Codefendant has not provided any response to the subject Demand for Inspection and Copying of Documents, Set One.  (Motion 2788, Baurac Decl., ¶ 9.) 

          Considering the foregoing, the Court grants Defendant’s motion pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 2031.300 and orders Codefendant to provide verified responses, without objections, to Demand for Inspection and Copying of Documents, Set One.

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

1. Defendant’s Motion to Compel Codefendant to respond to Defendant’s Form Interrogatories, Set One, is GRANTED pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section  2030.290.  The Court orders Codefendant to provide verified responses to Form Interrogatories, Set One, without objections, within twenty (20) days of notice of the Court’s orders.

    

2. Defendant’s Motion to Compel Codefendant to respond to Defendant’s Special Interrogatories, Set One, is GRANTED pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section  2030.290.  The Court orders Codefendant to provide verified responses to Special Interrogatories, Set One, without objections, within twenty (20) days of notice of the Court’s orders.

    

3. Defendant’s Motion to Compel to Codefendant to respond to Defendant’s Demand for Inspection and Copying of Documents, Set One, is GRANTED pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 2031.300.  The Court orders Codefendant to provide verified responses, without objections, within twenty (20) days of notice of the Court’s orders.

    

Defendant shall provide notice of the Court’s orders and file a proof of service regarding the same.