Judge: Michelle C. Kim, Case: 19STCV07163, Date: 2023-04-24 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 19STCV07163    Hearing Date: April 24, 2023    Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

 

SHAHNAZ FAZELINIA,

                        Plaintiff(s),

            vs.

 

MICHAEL VINCENT DAVIS, ET AL.,

 

                        Defendant(s).

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

      CASE NO: 19STCV07163

 

[TENTATIVE] ORDER (1) CONTINUING MOTION TO DISMISS; (2) CONTINUING MOTIONS TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSES 

 

Dept. 31

1:30 p.m.

April 24, 2023

 

On February 28, 2019, Plaintiff, Shahnaz Fazelinia (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Defendant Michael Vincent Davis (“Defendant”) for damages arising from a motor vehicle accident. 

 

On November 2, 2022, Defendant filed the instant motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s complaint pursuant to CCP § 583.410.  Additionally, on January 11, 2023, Defendant filed the instant motions to compel further responses to requests for production of documents (“RPDs”), set one, form interrogatories, set one, and special interrogatories, set one, against Plaintiff. 

 

The motions to compel were last heard on March 8, 2023.  The Court noted that the parties participated in an Informal Discovery Conference (“IDC”) regarding the discovery on January 31, 2023. The parties appeared at the IDC, and the issues were deemed resolved. The parties agreed that Plaintiff would provide substantive verified responses by February 28, 2023, and if responses were provided, the instant motions to compel further would be taken off calendar.  On February 23, 2023, Plaintiff filed a Statement of Non-Opposition to each motion providing that Plaintiff agreed to serve verified responses to Defendant and was attempting to finalize the responses.  Nothing additional relating to the motions to compel further was filed prior to the March 8, 2023 hearing date.  Pursuant to oral stipulation, the hearing date was continued April 24, 2023.  (Min. Order, March 8, 2023.)  Defendant’s motion to dismiss, which was then scheduled for hearing for March 14, 2023, was advanced and continued to April 24, 2023 to be heard with the motions to compel further. 

 

On March 8, 2023, Defendant filed a Notice of Ruling stating that defendant was not withdrawing the motions to compel further because Plaintiff did not comply with the agreements made at the IDC.  Defendant states that Plaintiff did not provide signed verifications until the morning of the hearing and did not provide substantive responses.  Defendant further provided that the motion to dismiss would be moot if it was not continued. 

 

            Because of the unclear status of the current state of the discovery disputes, the motions to compel further will be continued briefly for the parties to file a joint statement of items in dispute.  The joint statement must be a single document, with analysis by both parties, addressing each remaining issue.  The joint statement must be filed five court days before the continued hearing date.  Further, given Defendant’s representation that the motion to dismiss would be moot if not continued, the Court will also continue the motion to dismiss to be heard with the motions to compel further. 

 

            Defendant’s motions to compel further responses and motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s complaint are continued to ___________ at 1:30 p.m. in this Department. 

 

Defendant is ordered to give notice. 

 

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE:

 

Dated this 24th day of April 2023

 

 

 

 

Hon. Michelle C. Kim

Judge of the Superior Court