Judge: Robert B. Broadbelt, Case: 21STCV02859, Date: 2023-01-25 Tentative Ruling
Tentative rulings are sometimes, but not always, posted. The purpose of posting a tentative ruling is to to help focus the argument. The posting of a tentative ruling is not an invitation for the filing of additional papers shortly before the hearing.
Case Number: 21STCV02859 Hearing Date: January 25, 2023 Dept: 53
Superior Court of California
County of Los Angeles – Central District
Department
53
|
consumer advocacy group, inc. vs. |
Case
No.: |
21STCV02859 |
|
|
|
|
|
Hearing
Date: |
January
25, 2023 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Time: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[Tentative]
Order RE: motion to deem requests for admission
admitted |
||
MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff Consumer Advocacy
Group
RESPONDING PARTY: Unopposed
Motion to Deem Requests for Admission Admitted
The court
considered the moving papers filed in connection with this motion. No opposition papers were filed.
DISCUSSION
Plaintiff Consumer Advocacy Group, Inc.
(“Plaintiff”) moves the court for an order (1) deeming admitted the truth of
the matters specified in Plaintiff’s Requests for Admission, Set One, served on
defendant Midland Hardware Company No. 4 (“Defendant”), and (2) awarding
sanctions in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendant in the amount of
$1,747.50.
If a party to whom requests for admission
are directed fails to serve a timely response, the court shall, upon motion by
the propounding party, order that the matters specified in the requests be
deemed admitted unless the court finds that the party to whom the requests for
admission have been directed has served substantially compliant responses
before the hearing on the motion.¿ (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.280, subds. (b),
(c).)
Plaintiff served on Defendant its Requests
for Admission, Set One, on February 4, 2022.
(Rasiah Decl., ¶ 2; Rasiah Decl., Ex. A.) Although Defendant was granted an extension,
Defendant did not serve timely responses, and had not provided responses as of
the date that Plaintiff filed this motion.
(Rasiah Decl., ¶¶ 3, 5.)
Defendant has not filed an opposition or other evidence with the court
establishing that responses have been served.
The court finds that Defendant has not
served responses to Plaintiff’s Requests for Admission, Set One, and therefore
grants Plaintiff’s motion. (Code Civ.
Proc., § 2033.280, subds. (b), (c).)
The court grants Plaintiff’s request for
monetary sanctions against Defendant.
(Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.280, subd. (c).) The court finds that $997.50 (2.5 hours x $375
hourly rate + $60 filing fee) is a reasonable amount of sanctions to impose
against Defendant in connection with this motion. (Rasiah Decl., ¶ 6.)
ORDER
The court grants plaintiff Consumer Advocacy
Group, Inc.’s motion to deem requests for admission admitted.
The court orders that the truth of the
matters specified in plaintiff Consumer Advocacy Group, Inc.’s Requests for
Admission, Set One, served on defendant Midland Hardware Company No. 4 on
February 4, 2022, as attached as Exhibit A to the declaration of Ruth Rasiah,
is deemed admitted. (Code Civ. Proc., §
2033.280, subd. (b).)
The court orders defendant Midland Hardware
Company No. 4 to pay sanctions to plaintiff Consumer Advocacy Group, Inc. in
the amount of $997.50 within 30 days of the date of service of this order.
The court orders plaintiff Consumer Advocacy Group, Inc. to give
notice of this ruling.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED:
_____________________________
Robert
B. Broadbelt III
Judge
of the Superior Court