Judge: Robert B. Broadbelt, Case: 21STCV34332, Date: 2022-08-18 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV34332    Hearing Date: August 18, 2022    Dept: 53

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles – Central District

Department 53

MOVING PARTY:                Plaintiff Anchor General Insurance Company

RESPONDING PARTIES:     Defendant Quincy King

Motion to Deem Requests for Admissions Admitted

The court considered the moving and opposition papers filed in connection with this motion.

DISCUSSION

Plaintiff Anchor General Insurance Company (“Plaintiff”) moves the court for an order (1) deeming its Requests for Admissions (Set One), served on defendant Quincy Lee King (“Defendant”), admitted, and (2) awarding sanctions against Defendant and in favor of Plaintiff in the sum of $586.65.

Plaintiff served its Requests for Admissions (Set One) on Defendant on January 5, 2022.  (Wasson Decl., ¶ 5, Ex. C.)  Defendant filed an untimely opposition, arguing that (1) Plaintiff never filed and served a motion to deem requests for admissions admitted, and (2) even if Plaintiff had served such a motion, it would be moot because Defendant has served responses. 

As to the first point, Plaintiff did file its pending motion with the court on March 21, 2022, with a hearing date set for August 18, 2022, and also filed a Proof of Service stating that Defendant was served by electronic service at the correct email address on March 21, 2022. 

As to the second point, the court notes that, although Defendant argues that responses have been served, Defendant has not submitted evidence of that service.  Further, Plaintiff filed a “Notice of Non-Opposition” to its motion on August 9, 2022, but did not state that responses had been served or otherwise indicate that its motion (aside from the issue of sanctions) is moot.  Plaintiff has not filed reply papers addressing Defendant’s arguments.

However, the court notes that, on July 13, 2022, Plaintiff filed a motion to compel Defendant’s further responses to its Requests for Admissions (Set One).  This motion argues that (1) Plaintiff served the Requests for Admissions (Set One) on January 5, 2022, and (2) Defendant served responses to Plaintiff’s requests on May 27, 2022.  (Pl. July 13, 2022 Motion to Compel Further, Solis Decl., ¶¶ 3-4, Ex. B.) 

 The court therefore finds that Defendant has served, before the hearing on this motion, a response to Plaintiff’s Requests for Admission (Set One) that is in substantial compliance with Code of Civil Procedure section 2033.22, and the court denies Plaintiff’s motion.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.280, subd. (c).)

The court grants Plaintiff’s request for sanctions against Defendant.  The court finds that $586.65 (3.0 hours x $175 hourly rate + $61.65 filing fee) is a reasonable amount of monetary sanctions to impose against Defendant on this motion. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.280, subd. (c).)

ORDER

            The court denies as moot plaintiff Anchor General Insurance Company’s motion to deem requests for admissions admitted as to defendant Quincy Lee King.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.280, subd. (c).)

            The court grants plaintiff Anchor General Insurance Company’s request for monetary sanctions against defendant Quincy Lee King.  The court orders defendant Quincy Lee King to pay monetary sanctions to plaintiff Anchor General Insurance Company in the amount of $586.65 within 30 days of the date of this order.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.280, subd. (c).)

The court orders plaintiff Anchor General Insurance Company to give notice of this ruling.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED:  August 18, 2022

_____________________________

Robert B. Broadbelt III

Judge of the Superior Court