Judge: Michelle C. Kim, Case: 19STCV12152, Date: 2023-10-04 Tentative Ruling


Case Number: 19STCV12152    Hearing Date: October 4, 2023    Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA  

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT 

 

ILAN N. ROSEN JANFAZA, 

Plaintiff(s),  

vs. 

 

ANDRES GUTIERREZ, ET AL., 

 

Defendant(s). 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

      CASE NO: 19STCV12152 

 

[TENTATIVE] ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO COMPEL 

 

Dept. 31 

1:30 p.m.  

October 4, 2023 

 

I. Motions to Compel¿ 

Defendants Andres Gutierrez and Elizabeth Gutierrez (“Defendants”) propounded request for production of documents (“RPDs”), set two, on Plaintiff Ilan N. Rosen Janfaza (“Plaintiff”) on March 30, 2023. After having not received responses, defense counsel sent correspondence to Plaintiff’s counsel requesting responses by May 18, 2023. To date, Plaintiff has not served responses. Defendants therefore seek an order compelling Plaintiff to respond, without objections, to the outstanding discovery and to pay sanctions.  

Any opposition was due on or before September 21, 2023; none was filed. 

For a motion to compel 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., § 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., § 2031.300, subd. (a).)  

Therefore, because the evidence shows Plaintiff was properly served with discovery and failed to respond, and Plaintiff has not demonstrated responses were served prior to the hearing in substantial compliance with the Discovery Act, Defendants’ motion is GRANTED. Plaintiff is ordered to serve verified responses to Defendants’ RPDs, set two, without objections, within fifteen (15) days. (CCP §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 to interrogatories, unless a court makes certain findings.¿ (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.300(c).)¿Plaintiff did not file any opposition. However, sanctions may be awarded, even though no opposition is filed pursuant to CRC 3.1348(a). Defendants seek sanctions in the amount of $455.34 for the motion.  

Defendants are awarded 1 hour to prepare the motion to compel and one hour to appear at the hearing at the requested rate of $160.17 per hour, for a total of $320.34 in attorneys’ fees. Further, Defendants are awarded one motion filing fee of $60, as costs.   

Sanctions are imposed against Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s attorney of record, jointly and severally.  Plaintiff and/or Plaintiff’s counsel are ordered to pay sanctions to Defendants, by and through their counsel of record, in the total amount of $380.34, within fifteen (15) days.  

 

Defendants are 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 3rd day of October 2023 

 

  

 

 

Hon. Michelle C. Kim 

Judge of the Superior Court