Judge: Michelle C. Kim, Case: 20STCV45881, Date: 2023-12-18 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 20STCV45881    Hearing Date: February 22, 2024    Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA  

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT 

 

JULIE MURADYAN, 

Plaintiff(s),  

vs. 

 

INDERJIT KAUR, ET AL., 

 

Defendant(s). 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

      CASE NO: 20STCV45881 

 

[TENTATIVE] ORDER RE: DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO SUPPLEMENTAL DISCOVERY 

 

   

Dept. 31 

1:30 p.m.  

February 22, 2024 

 

I. Motion to Compel 

On February 17, 2023, defendant Inderjit Kaur (“Kaur”) propounded supplemental interrogatories, set one, on plaintiff Julie Muradyan (“Plaintiff”). (Mot. Exh. A.) Responses were due on March 21, 2023. After granting Plaintiff’s request for a two-week extension, to date, Plaintiff has not served responses. Defendant Kaur now moves the Court for an order compelling Plaintiff to provide responses to the outstanding discovery and to pay sanctions. 

As of February 8, 2024, no opposition has been filed.  

A party may propound a supplemental interrogatory or supplemental demand for production of documents to elicit any later acquired information bearing on all answers previously made by any party.  (Code of Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.070, subd. (a), 2031.050, subd. (a).)  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; Healthcare Consulting, Inc. v. Pacific Healthcare Consultants (2007) 148 Cal.App.4th 390, 403.) A party may propound a supplemental interrogatory or supplemental demand for production twice before the initial trial date, and subject to the time limits of discovery proceedings. (Code of Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.070, subd. (b), 2031.050, subd. (b).)  

The Court notes that defense counsel’s declaration states both defendants Kaur and Tarsem Khinda propounded supplemental interrogatories, set one, on February 17, 2023. However, the evidence only demonstrates that Kaur had propounded the discovery at issue. Thus, the Court limits its order to that which is supported.  

Therefore, because the evidence shows Plaintiff was properly served with discovery and failed to respond, Kaur’s unopposed motion is GRANTED. Plaintiff is ordered to serve verified responses to defendant Kaur’s supplemental interrogatories, set one, within fifteen (15) days.  

 

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).)¿ Plaintiff did not file any opposition. However, sanctions may be awarded, even though no opposition was filed, pursuant to CRC 3.1348(a).   

Kaur is awarded 1 hour to prepare the motion to compel and one hour to appear at the hearing at the requested rate of $175 per hour, for a total of $350 in attorney fees. Further, Kaur is awarded one motion filing fee of $61.65, as costs. 

Sanctions are sought and imposed against Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s attorney of record, jointly and severally.  Plaintiff and/or Plaintiff’s counsel are ordered to pay sanctions to defendant Kaur, by and through counsel of record, in the total amount of $411.65, within fifteen (15) 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 21st day of February 2024 

 

  

 

 

Hon. Michelle C. Kim 

Judge of the Superior Court