Judge: Michelle C. Kim, Case: 21STCV34580, Date: 2023-07-20 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV34580    Hearing Date: December 13, 2023    Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA  

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT 

 

NAPOLEON PEREZ RAMIREZ, ET AL. 

Plaintiff(s),  

vs. 

 

CHRISTINA LEWIS, ET AL., 

 

Defendant(s). 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

      CASE NO: 21STCV34580 

 

[TENTATIVE] ORDER GRANTING UNOPPOSED MOTIONS TO COMPEL 

 

Dept. 31 

1:30 p.m.  

December 13, 2023 

 

I. Motion to Compel 

Defendant/Cross-Complainant Hollywood Honeywagon Production Vehicles (“Hollywood Honeywagon”) propounded set one of form interrogatories, special interrogatories, and request for production of documents on Cross-Defendant Sandra Vidaurri, erroneously sued as Sandra Jauregui, (“Sandra”) on August 15, 2023 via U.S. Mail. (Lewis Decl. 2.) Sandra’s responses were due on September 20, 2023. (Ibid.) To date, Sandra has not served responses. (Id. at 6.) Hollywood Honeywagon therefore seek an order compelling Sandra respond, without objections, to the outstanding discovery and to pay sanctions. The instant motions were served on Sandra, who is in pro per.  

The motions are unopposed.  

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., §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 Sandra was properly served with discovery and failed to respond, Hollywood Honeywagon’s motions are GRANTED. Sandra is ordered to serve verified responses to Hollywood Honeywagon’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).)¿ Sandra did not file any opposition. However, sanctions may be awarded, even though no opposition was filed, pursuant to CRC 3.1348(a). Hollywood Honeywagon seeks sanctions in the amount of $1,560 for the motion.     

A court has discretion to award sanctions that are “suitable and necessary to enable the party seeking discovery to obtain the objects of the discovery he seeks” but they should not be punitive in nature or levied for the purposes of punishing an offending party. (Vallbona v. Springer (1996) 43 Cal.App.4th 1525, 1545.)  

In consideration of Sandra’s status in propria, Hollywood Honeywagon is awarded $300 in attorney fees for each motion, for a total of $900 as attorney’s fees. Additionally, Hollywood Honeywagon is awarded three motion filing fee of $60, for a total of $180 as costs.  

Sanctions are imposed against Cross-Defendant Sandra. Cross-Defendant Sandra is ordered to pay sanctions to Hollywood Honeywagon, by and through counsel of record, in the total amount of $1,080, 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 12th day of December 2023 

 

  

 

 

Hon. Michelle C. Kim 

Judge of the Superior Court