Judge: Olivia Rosales, Case: 21NWCV00249, Date: 2022-08-11 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21NWCV00249    Hearing Date: August 11, 2022    Dept: SEC

RODRIGUEZ v. MULBERRY PARK HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION

CASE NO.:  21NWCV00249

HEARING:  08/11/22

JUDGE:  OLIVIA ROSALES

#2

TENTATIVE ORDER

     I.        Defendant’s Motion to Compel Plaintiff’s Responses to Special Interrogatories (set one) is MOOT.

    II.        Defendant’s Motion to Compel Plaintiff’s Responses to Form Interrogatories (set one) is MOOT.

  III.        Defendant’s unopposed Motion to Compel Plaintiff’s Responses to Request for Production of Documents (set one) is GRANTED.

Moving Party to give Notice.

If a party to whom interrogatories and document demands are directed fails to respond at all, the propounding party’s remedy is to seek a court order compelling answers thereto. (CCP §§ 2030.290, 2031.300.) All that needs to be shown is that the discovery was properly served on the opposing party, that the time to respond has expired, and that no response of any kind has been served. The moving party is not required to show a reasonable and good faith attempt to resolve the matter informally before filing this motion. A motion to compel initial discovery responses need not show good cause, meeting and conferring, or timely filing, and need not be accompanied by a separate statement. (See Sinaiko Healthcare Consulting, Inc. v. Pac. Healthcare Consultants (2007) 148 Cal.App.4th 390, 404.) The failure to timely respond also waives all objections.

Special and Form Interrogatories:

The parties dispute whether the discovery at issue was properly served. Defendant contends that the discovery was served via email on August 18, 2021 to the email address: jwright@stonesalluslaw.com.

In Opposition(s) Plaintiff contends that the only email address for service on this case is jsdceservice@stonesalluslaw.com. Notwithstanding, Plaintiff acknowledged receipt of Form Interrogatories (set one) and Special Interrogatories (set one) on April 13, 2022. (See Crouse Decls. Exs. 2.) Plaintiff indicates that responses to Special Interrogatories (set one) and Form Interrogatories (set two) were served on May 5, 2022 and then again on June 24, 2022.

No Reply(s) have been filed as of August 9, 2022.

The Motions to Compel Special Interrogatories (set one) and Form Interrogatories (set one) are DENIED as MOOT. Sanctions are DENIED since the responses were served prior to the date the instant Motions were filed.

Request for Production of Documents:

The unopposed Motion to Compel Responses to Request for Production of Documents (set one) is GRANTED. Defendant has shown that Request for Production of Documents (set one) was served onto Plaintiff by at least April 13, 2022. (see Townsley Decl., Ex. D.). The deadline to respond has expired, and no responses of any kind have been provided.  Defendant filed this Motion on May 17, 2022, two months after service of the discovery. As of August 9, 2022, no Opposition has been filed to the subject Motion.

Sanctions may be awarded against a party who fails to oppose a motion to compel, or opposition to the motion was withdrawn, or the requested discovery was provided after the motion was filed. (C.R.C 3.1348(a).). Reasonable sanctions are awarded as indicated below:

Defendant’s request for sanctions is GRANTED in part as follows: Plaintiff and their Counsel of Record are ORDERED to pay Defendant and its counsel of record sanctions in the reduced amount of $210.00 ($150/hr. x 1) ($60.00 costs) no later than 30 days from the Court’s issuance of this Order. This date may be extended per agreement of the parties.