Judge: Robert B. Broadbelt, Case: 23STCV18892, Date: 2025-02-26 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 23STCV18892 Hearing Date: February 26, 2025 Dept: 53
Superior Court of California
County of Los Angeles – Central District
Department
53
|
vs. |
Case
No.: |
23STCV18892 |
|
|
|
|
|
Hearing
Date: |
February
26, 2025 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Time: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[tentative]
Order RE: plaintiff’s motion to compel further
responses to first set of requests for production of documents and request
for sanctions |
||
MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff Rocio Portillo
RESPONDING PARTY: Defendant Volkswagen Group of America
Motion to Compel Further Responses to First Set of Requests for
Production of Documents and Request for Sanctions
The court
considered the moving, opposition, and reply papers filed in connection with
this motion.
DISCUSSION
Plaintiff Rocio Portillo (“Plaintiff”) moves the court for an order
(1) compelling defendant Volkswagen Group of America (“Defendant”) to serve
further responses to Plaintiff’s Requests for Production of Documents, Set One,
numbers 35, 37-41, and 45-46 and (2) awarding monetary sanctions in favor of
Plaintiff and against Defendant in the amount of $2,310.
The court grants Plaintiff’s motion to compel Defendant’s further
response to Requests for Production of Documents, number 35, limited to
vehicles purchased in California for the same year, make, and model of the
subject vehicle.
The court grants Plaintiff’s motion to compel Defendant’s further
responses to Requests for Production of Documents, numbers 37-41, limited to the
defects alleged in Plaintiff’s Complaint in vehicles purchased in California
for the same year, make, and model of the subject vehicle.
The court denies Plaintiff’s motion to compel Defendant’s further
responses to Requests for Production of Documents, numbers 45-46 because (1)
those demands request documents for customer complaints by owners of 2021 Volkswagen
Jetta City vehicles, but (2) the Complaint alleges that the subject vehicle is a
2020 Audi A4, not a Jetta City, such that these demands request the production
of documents that are neither relevant to the subject matter involved in this
action nor appear reasonably calculated to the discovery of admissible
evidence. (Pl. Separate Statement, pp.
7:10-13 [Request No. 45], 8:7-10 [Request No. 46]; Compl., ¶ 17; Code Civ.
Proc., § 2017.010.)
In light of the mixed results of the court’s ruling, the court finds
that the imposition of sanctions would be unjust and therefore denies
Plaintiff’s request for monetary sanctions against Defendant. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.310, subd. (h).)
ORDER
The court grants in part plaintiff
Rocio Portillo’s motion to compel further responses to first set of requests
for production of documents and request for sanctions as follows.
Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure
section 2031.310, the court orders defendant Volkswagen Group of America, Inc. (1)
to serve on plaintiff Rocio Portillo further written responses to plaintiff
Rocio Portillo’s Requests for Production of Documents (i) number 35, limited to
vehicles purchased in California for the same year, make, and model of the
subject vehicle, and (ii) numbers 37-41, limited to the defects alleged in plaintiff
Rocio Portillo’s Complaint in vehicles purchased in California for the same
year, make, and model of the subject vehicle, and (2) to produce to plaintiff
Rocio Portillo all documents and things in defendant Volkswagen
Group of America, Inc.’s possession, custody, or control which are responsive
to those requests (and limited as set forth above) within 20 days of the date
of this order.
The court denies all other relief
requested.
The court orders plaintiff Rocio
Portillo to give notice of this ruling.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED:
_____________________________
Robert
B. Broadbelt III
Judge
of the Superior Court