Judge: Michael E. Whitaker, Case: 21STCV38224, Date: 2023-01-11 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV38224    Hearing Date: January 11, 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

MOTIONS

            Plaintiff Ashot Galstyan (Defendant) moves to compel responses from Defendant Absolute Transportation, Inc. (Defendant) to Form Interrogatories, set one (FROG).  Plaintiff seeks monetary sanctions in connection with the motion.  Defendant has not filed an opposition to the motion.

ANALYSIS

Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 2030.290, “[i]f a party to whom interrogatories are directed fails to serve a timely response . . . [t]he party to whom the interrogatories are directed waives any right to exercise the option to produce writings under Section 2030.230, as well as any objection to the interrogatories, including one based on privilege or the protection for work product under Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 2018.010.  . . .   [and] The party propounding the interrogatories may move for an order compelling response to the interrogatories.”  (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.290, subds. (a)-(b).)  

Here, Plaintiff served the FROG on Defendant on June 24, 2022, electronically and via mail.  Defendant’s responses were thus due by July 29, 2022.  As of the filing date of the motion, Plaintiff has not received responses from Defendant.  Accordingly, the Court finds that Defendant has failed to serve timely responses to the FROG.

Plaintiff requests monetary sanctions in connection with the motion.  The Court finds Defendant’s failure to timely respond to the FROG to be an abuse of the discovery process, warranting monetary sanctions.  (See Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2023.010, subd. (d), 2030.290, subd. (c).)  Accordingly, the Court will impose monetary sanctions against Defendant, in the amount of $560, which represents two hours of attorney time to prepare the moving papers, and attend the hearing, at $250 per hour, plus the filing fee of $60.

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

Therefore, the Court grants Plaintiff’s motions to compel responses to the FROG per Code of Civil Procedure sections 2030.290.  As such, the Court orders Defendant to serve verified responses to the FROG, without objections, within 30 days of notice of the Court’s orders.

Further, the Court orders Defendant to pay monetary sanctions in the amount of $560 to Plaintiff, by and through counsel for Plaintiff, within 30 days of notice of the Court’s orders.

Plaintiff shall provide notice of the Court’s orders and file a proof of service of such.