Judge: Robert B. Broadbelt, Case: 22STCV35678, Date: 2024-03-20 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: 22STCV35678 Hearing Date: March 21, 2024 Dept: 53
Superior Court of California
County of Los Angeles – Central District
Department
53
|
vs. |
Case
No.: |
22STCV35678 |
|
|
|
|
|
Hearing
Date: |
March
21, 2024 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Time: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[Tentative]
Order RE: plaintiff’s motion to compel responses to
demand for inspection and copying |
||
MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff Kimberly Lucero
RESPONDING PARTY: Defendant General Motors LLC
Motion to Compel Responses to Demand for Inspection and Copying
The court
considered the moving and opposition papers filed in connection with this
motion. No reply papers were filed.
DISCUSSION
Plaintiff
Kimberly Lucero (“Plaintiff”) moves the court for an order (1) compelling
defendant General Motors LLC (“Defendant”) to serve verified responses, without
objections, to Plaintiff’s Demand for Inspection and Copying, Set One, and (2)
awarding monetary sanctions in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendant in the
amount of $2,004.15.
If
a party to whom a demand for inspection is directed fails to serve a timely
response, the party making the demand may move for an order compelling response
to the demand.¿ (Code Civ. Proc., §¿2031.300, subd. (b).)¿
Plaintiff
served Defendant with the Requests for Production of Documents, Set One, on
March 8, 2023, by mail. (Yashar Decl.,
Ex. 1.) Defendant did not timely serve
responses and had not served responses as of the date that Plaintiff filed this
motion. (Yashar Decl., ¶ 4.) In opposition, Defendant has submitted
evidence showing that it served, on August 9, 2023, responses to Plaintiff’s
Requests for Production of Documents.
(Valencia Decl., Ex. A.) The
court, however, notes that Defendant has asserted objections to various
demands. (Ibid.) By failing to serve timely responses to
Plaintiff’s Requests for Production of Documents, Defendant has “waive[d] any
objection to the demand[s].”[1]
(Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.300, subd. (a).)
Thus, the
court finds that Plaintiff is entitled to an order compelling Defendant to
serve verified responses, without objections, to Plaintiff’s Requests for
Production of Documents, Set One, and therefore grants Plaintiff’s motion. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.300, subd.
(b).)
The court
grants Plaintiff’s request for monetary sanctions. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.300, subd.
(c).) The court finds that $1,366.65 ((3
hours x $425 hourly rate) + $91.65 filing fees) is a reasonable amount of
sanctions to impose against Defendant in connection with this motion. (Yashar Decl., ¶¶ 7-8.)
ORDER
The court grants plaintiff Kimberly
Lucero’s motion to compel written responses to demand for inspection and
copying, set one.
Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure
section 2031.300, the court orders defendant General Motors LLC (1) to serve on
plaintiff Kimberly Lucero full and complete verified responses, without
objections, to plaintiff Kimberly Lucero’s Requests for Production of
Documents, Set One, that comply with Code of Civil Procedure sections
2031.210-2031.250, and (2) to produce to plaintiff Kimberly Lucero all
documents and things in defendant General Motors LLC’s possession, custody, or
control which are responsive to those requests, within 20 days of the date of
this order.
The court orders defendant General
Motors LLC to pay monetary sanctions to plaintiff Kimberly Lucero in the amount
of $1,366.65 within 30 days of the date of this order.
The court orders plaintiff Kimberly
Lucero to give notice of this ruling.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED:
_____________________________
Robert
B. Broadbelt III
Judge
of the Superior Court
[1]
The court does not rule on any request by Defendant, raised in its opposition
papers, to be relieved from its waiver of objections. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.300, subd. (a) [“The
court, on motion, may relieve that party from this waiver” on
determination that the statutory conditions are satisfied] [emphasis
added].)