Judge: Michael P. Linfield, Case: 23STCV18039, Date: 2024-04-26 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 23STCV18039 Hearing Date: April 26, 2024 Dept: 34
SUBJECT: Motion to Compel Further Responses,
Without Objections, to Special Interrogatories (Set One), and Request for Order
Awarding Monetary Sanctions Against Defendant and His Counsel Herein
Moving Party: Plaintiff
Edwin Haratonians
Resp. Party: Defendant Maurice Maalouf
The Further SROGs Motion is GRANTED.
Defendant shall provide
further responses to the SROGs at issue within 10 days of the issuance of this
Order.
Plaintiff’s Request for
Sanctions is GRANTED in part. Monetary sanctions are AWARDED in favor of
Plaintiff and against Defendant and Defense Counsel, jointly and severally, in
the total amount of $1,635.00.
On August 1, 2023, Plaintiffs Edwin Haratonians and
Wellness Care Residence, LLC filed their Complaint against Maurice Maalouf on
the following causes of action: (1) declaratory relief; (2) breach of fiduciary
duty (two counts); (3) accounting; and (4) dissociation of member.
On September 26, 2023, Defendant filed his Answer to the
Complaint.
On October 11, 2023, the Court found related cases
23STCV12206 and 23STCV18039, and designated 23STCV12206 as the lead case.
On April 2, 2024, Plaintiff Edwin Haratonians
(“Plaintiff”) filed his Motion to Compel Further Responses, Without Objections,
to Special Interrogatories (Set One), and Request for Order Awarding Monetary
Sanctions Against Defendant and His Counsel Herein (“Further SROGs Motion”). In
support of his Further SROGs Motion, Plaintiff concurrently filed: (1) Separate
Statement; and (2) Exhibits to Declaration of Burton Mark Senkfor.
On April 15, 2024, Defendant filed his Opposition to the
Further SROGs Motion.
On April 22, 2024, Plaintiff filed his Reply in support
of the Further SROGs Motion.
ANALYSIS:
I.
Legal
Standard
On receipt of a response
to form interrogatories, special interrogatories, and/or demand requests, the
propounding and/or demanding party “may move for an order compelling further
response” if: (1) the response is evasive or incomplete; (2) the representation
of inability to comply is inadequate, incomplete, or evasive; or (3) the
objection is without merit or too general. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.300, subd.
(a), 2031.310, subd. (a).)
The court shall
impose monetary sanctions against any party, person, or attorney who unsuccessfully
makes or opposes a motion to compel further interrogatories and/or a motion to
compel further production of documents, unless the Court finds that the one
subject to sanction acted with substantial justification or that other
circumstances make the imposition of the sanction unjust. (Code Civ. Proc., §§
2030.300, subd. (d), 2031.310, subd. (h).)
II.
Discussion
A. The
Parties’ Arguments
Plaintiff moves the Court to compel further
responses to: (1) certain special interrogatories (“SROGs”); and (2) award
monetary sanctions in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendant and Defense
Counsel. (Further SROGs Motion, p. 8:8–9.)
Defendant opposes the Further SROGs Motion,
arguing: (1) that Plaintiff had a late meet and confer; (2) that Plaintiff has
not met the good faith element for granting this motion; (3) that the motion is
defective; (4) that the objections are well-taken; and (5) that Defendant has
substantially responded to all subject interrogatories. (Opposition, pp.
3:23–25, 5:20, 6:1–4.)
Plaintiff focuses most of his Reply on the
meet and confer. (Reply, pp. 5–9.)
B. The
Meet and Confer
1. Legal
Standard
“On receipt of a
response to interrogatories, the propounding party may move for an order
compelling a further response . . . .” (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.300, subd.
(a).)
“A motion under
subdivision (a) shall be accompanied by a meet and confer declaration under
Section 2016.040.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.300, subd. (b)(1).)
“A meet and
confer declaration in support of a motion shall state facts showing a
reasonable and good faith attempt at an informal resolution of each issue
presented by the motion.” (Code Civ. Proc., 2016.040.)
2. Discussion
Here, Plaintiff’s Counsel declared that they
“personally verbally ‘met and conferred’ with [Defense Counsel] during a break
in Haratonians all-day, in person deposition on March 29, 2024, regarding the
insufficient Maalouf discovery responses.” (Further SROGs Motion, Decl. Senkfor,
¶ 2.)
The meet and confer standard has been met
here.
Furthermore, the Court has not been presented
with any reason for why (much less evidence that would indicate that) Plaintiff
and/or Plaintiff’s Counsel are acting in bad faith by bringing the Further
SROGs Motion.
C. The
SROGs at Issue
The following are the SROGs at issue:
Special Interrogatory No. 1:
Please DESCRIBE ALL MONETARY PAYMENTS made by YOU directly to WELLNESS
LLC at any time (including but not limited to as a capital contribution, as a
financial contribution, or for any other reason).
Special Interrogatory No. 2:
Please DESCRIBE ALL MONETARY PAYMENTS made by HARATONIANS directly to
WELLNESS LLC at any time (including but not limited to as a capital
contribution, as a financial contribution, or for any other reason).
Special Interrogatory No. 3:
Please DESCRIBE ALL MONETARY PAYMENTS made by BOUTROS directly to
WELLNESS LLC at any time (as a capital contribution, as a financial
contribution, or for any other reason).
Special Interrogatory No. 4:
Please DESCRIBE ALL MONETARY PAYMENTS made by any of the WELLNESS LLC
MEMBERS at any time as a capital contribution [financial contribution] to
WELLNESS LLC.
Special Interrogatory No. 5:
Please DESCRIBE ALL MONETARY PAYMENTS made by YOU on behalf of (but not
directly to) WELLNESS LLC at any time.
Special Interrogatory No. 6:
Please DESCRIBE ALL MONETARY PAYMENTS made by HARATONIANS on behalf of
(but not directly to) WELLNESS LLC at any time.
Special Interrogatory No. 7:
Please DESCRIBE ALL MONETARY PAYMENTS made by BOUTROS on behalf of (but
not directly to) WELLNESS LLC at any time.
Special Interrogatory No. 9:
[For purposes of these interrogatories: “MAALOUF COMPANY” means any
corporation, partnership, limited liability company, joint venture,
unincorporated association, business utilizing a fictitious name, or other
business or entity of any type, as to which MAALOUF had any ownership interest
in, or was a director, officer, manager, member, principal, or employee
thereof.]
Please DESCRIBE ALL MONETARY PAYMENTS made by a MAALOUF COMPANY on
behalf of (but not directly to) WELLNESS LLC at any time.
Special Interrogatory No. 10:
Please DESCRIBE ALL MONETARY PAYMENTS received by YOU directly from
WELLNESS LLC at any time (as a return of a capital contribution, as a return of
a financial contribution, or for any other reason).
Special Interrogatory No. 11:
Please DESCRIBE ALL MONETARY PAYMENTS received by HARATONIANS directly
from WELLNESS LLC at any time (as a return of a capital contribution, as a
return of a financial contribution, or for any other reason).
Special Interrogatory No. 12:
Please DESCRIBE ALL MONETARY PAYMENTS received by BOUTROS directly from
WELLNESS LLC at any time (as a return of a capital contribution, as a return of
a financial contribution, or for any other reason).
Special Interrogatory No. 13:
Please DESCRIBE ALL MONETARY PAYMENTS received by a MAALOUF COMPANY
directly from WELLNESS LLC at any time (as a return of a capital contribution
by YOU, as a return of a financial contribution by YOU, or for any other
reason).
Special Interrogatory No. 14:
Please DESCRIBE ALL MONETARY PAYMENTS made by WELLNESS LLC directly at
any time RELATING to work done (including but not limited to construction and
maintenance) at the WELLNESS PROPERTY.
Special Interrogatory No. 15:
Please DESCRIBE ALL MONETARYPAYMENTS made by WELLNESS LLC directly at any
time, other than payments RELATING to work done at the WELLNESS PROPERTY.
Special Interrogatory No. 16:
Please DESCRIBE ALL MONETARY PAYMENTS made by YOU directly at any time
RELATING to work done (including but not limited to construction and maintenance)
at the WELLNESS PROPERTY.
Special Interrogatory No. 17:
Please DESCRIBE ALL MONETARY PAYMENTS made by a MAALOUF COMPANY
directly at any time RELATING to work done (including but not limited to
construction and maintenance) at the WELLNESS PROPERTY.
Special Interrogatory No. 18:
Please IDENTIFY each person (including an entity) who received any
monetary payment directly from WELLNESS LLC for work done (including but not
limited to construction and maintenance) at the WELLNESS PROPERTY.
Special Interrogatory No. 19:
Please IDENTIFY each person (including an entity) who received any
monetary payment directly from YOU for work done (including but not limited to
construction and maintenance) at the WELLNESS PROPERTY.
Special Interrogatory No. 20:
Please IDENTIFY each person (including an entity) who received any
monetary payment directly from a MAALOUF COMPANY for work done (including but
not limited to construction and maintenance) at the WELLNESS PROPERTY.
The SROGs request information that is
relevant to this matter and are sufficiently narrow in scope.
D. Further
Responses to the SROGs
Defendant’s responses to the SROGs have been
evasive.
The initial responses were boilerplate
objections, which the Court finds to be unmeritorious.
The subsequent responses also consist mostly
of boilerplate objections, which the Court does not find to be meritorious.
Specifically, objections that point to spreadsheets and other sources but then
tell Plaintiff to find the information himself are not sufficient answers to
the SROGs. Rather, those are evasive responses that do not actually answer the
SROGs. Defendant must answer the SROGs himself, even if Plaintiff has access to
the same information.
The Court GRANTS the Further SROGs Motion.
E. Sanctions
Plaintiff requests monetary sanctions in the
amount of $5,310.00 against Defendant and Defense Counsel. (Further SROGs
Motion, p. 8:1–4.)
The Court does not have evidence before it
that would indicate there is substantial justification or other circumstances
that would make the imposition of a sanction unjust. Thus, the Court must
impose a monetary sanction. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.300, subd. (d); 2031.310, subd.
(h); 2033.290, subd. (d).)
Plaintiff’s Counsel declares: (1) that they charge
$525.00 per hour in this matter; (2) that they worked ten hours on the motion
and (3) that they incurred $60.00 in filing costs for the motion. (Further
SROGs Motion, Decl. Senkfor, ¶ 3.)
The hourly rate and costs
claimed are reasonable, but the number of hours claimed is not. The Court
AWARDS four hours of work at the requested hourly rate, plus all of the
requested costs.
III. Conclusion
The Further SROGs Motion is GRANTED.
Defendant shall provide
further responses to the SROGs at issue within 10 days of the issuance of this
Order.
Plaintiff’s Request for
Sanctions is GRANTED in part. Monetary sanctions are AWARDED in favor of
Plaintiff and against Defendant and Defense Counsel, jointly and severally, in
the total amount of $2,160.00.