Judge: Michelle C. Kim, Case: 19STCV00910, Date: 2023-12-20 Tentative Ruling


Case Number: 19STCV00910    Hearing Date: December 20, 2023    Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA  

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT 

 

TAMARA WALDMAN, 

Plaintiff(s),  

vs. 

 

TAE SUNG KANG, ET AL., 

 

Defendant(s). 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

      CASE NO: 19STCV00910 

 

[TENTATIVE] ORDER GRANTING UNOPPOSED MOTIONS TO COMPEL 

 

Dept. 31 

1:30 p.m.  

December 20, 2023 

 

I. Motions to Compel 

Defendant Tae Sung Kang ("Defendant”) propounded (1) form interrogatories, set one, (2) special interrogatories, set one, and (3) request for production of documents (“RPDs”), set one, on Plaintiff Tamara Waldman (“Plaintiff”) on January 3, 2023. After receiving no responses, defense counsel sent a letter to Plaintiff on February 7, 2023 requesting responses, without objections, by February 24, 2023. On February 24, 2023, after a telephonic conversation with Plaintiff’s counsel, Defendant granted an extension up to March 14, 2023 for Plaintiff to provide responses. Plaintiff has not served responses to date. Defendant therefore seeks an order compelling Plaintiff to respond, without objections, to the outstanding discovery and to pay sanctions.  

Any opposition was due on or before December 7, 2023. The motions are unopposed. 

For a motion to compel initial discovery responses, all a propounding party must show is that it properly served its discovery requests, that the time to respond has expired, and that the party to whom the requests were directed failed to provide a timely response. (See Leach v. Superior Court (1980) 111 Cal.App.3d 902, 905 906.) Where a party fails to serve timely responses to discovery requests, the court may make an order compelling responses. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.290; 2031.300; Sinaiko Healthcare Consulting, Inc. v. Pacific Healthcare Consultants (2007) 148 Cal.App.4th 390, 403.) A party that fails to serve timely responses waives any objections to the request, including ones based on privilege or the protection of attorney work product. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.290, subd. (a); § 2031.300, subd. (a).)   

Therefore, because the evidence shows Plaintiff was properly served with discovery and failed to respond, Defendant’s motions are GRANTED. Plaintiff is ordered to serve verified responses to Defendant’s form interrogatories, set one, special interrogatories, set one, and RPDs, set one, without objections, within twenty (20) days. (CCP §§ 2030.290(a),(b), 2031.300(a),(b).) 

 

II. Sanctions 

Sanctions are mandatory against any party, person, or attorney who unsuccessfully makes or opposes a motion to compel a response, unless a court makes certain findings.¿ (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.290(c), 2031.300(c).)¿ Plaintiff did not file any opposition. However, sanctions may be awarded, even though no opposition was filed, pursuant to CRC 3.1348(a). Defendant seeks sanctions in the amount of $455.34 for each motion to compel.    

Defendant is awarded 1 hour to prepare each motion at the legal assistant’s rate of $75 per hour, and an additional 1 hour to appear at the hearing at the attorney’s rate of $160.17 per hour, for a total of $385.17 in fees. Further, Defendant is awarded three motion filing fees of $60, for a total of $180 as costs.   

Sanctions are imposed against Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s attorney of record.  Plaintiff and/or Plaintiff’s counsel are ordered to pay sanctions to Defendant, by and through counsel of record, in the total amount of $565.17, within twenty (20) days. 

 

Moving party is ordered to give notice.   

 

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE: 

  • Parties are encouraged to meet and confer after reading this tentative ruling to see if they can reach an agreement. 

  • If a party intends to submit on this tentative ruling,¿the party must send an email to the court at¿sscdept31@lacourt.org¿with the Subject line “SUBMIT” followed by the case number.¿ The body of the email must include the hearing date and time, counsel’s contact information, and the identity of the party submitting.¿¿ 

  • Unless¿all¿parties submit by email to this tentative ruling, the parties should arrange to appear remotely (encouraged) or in person for oral argument.¿ You should assume that others may appear at the hearing to argue.¿¿ 

  • If the parties neither submit nor appear at hearing, the Court may take the motion off calendar or adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the Court.¿ After the Court has issued a tentative ruling, the Court may prohibit the withdrawal of the subject motion without leave.¿ 

 

Dated this 19th day of December 2023 

 

  

 

 

Hon. Michelle C. Kim 

Judge of the Superior Court