Judge: Robert C. Longstreth, Case: 37-2020-00008111-CU-WT-CTL, Date: 2024-03-01 Tentative Ruling

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,

DEPT.:

EVENT DATE:

EVENT TIME:

HALL OF JUSTICE

TENTATIVE RULINGS - February 29, 2024

03/01/2024  08:30:00 AM  C-65 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

JUDICIAL OFFICER:Robert Longstreth

CASE NO.:

CASE CATEGORY:

EVENT TYPE:

CASE TITLE: CASE TYPE:

Civil - Unlimited  Wrongful Termination Discovery Hearing 37-2020-00008111-CU-WT-CTL CASTRO VS SAN DIEGO CONVENTION CENTER CORPORATION INC [IMAGED] CAUSAL DOCUMENT/DATE FILED: Motion to Compel Discovery, 01/12/2024

Defendant's Motion to Compel Further Discovery Responses or, in the Alternative, Exclude Evidence at Trial (ROA 141) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.

Plaintiff asserts Defendant did not sufficiently meet and confer before filing this motion. Defendant's counsel sent Plaintiff's counsel an email regarding Plaintiff's discovery responses on December 5, 2023, and requesting further responses by December 21, 2023. Plaintiff does not dispute she never responded to this email. This motion was filed January 12, 2024. In the absence of any response to Defendant's initial meet and confer effort, Defendant's decision to file this motion was appropriate and the court finds that Defendant met its obligation to attempt to resolve informally before filing.

Defendant asserts Plaintiff's objections were waived because they were not timely served. This argument does not have merit. Responses to requests for production are due 30 days after service.

(Code Civ. Proc. § 2031.260(a).) Where service is made electronically, the deadline is extended by two court days. (Code Civ. Proc. § 1010.6(a)(3)(B).) Here, the requests were served electronically on Plaintiff on October 24, 2023. Thirty days after this date was Thursday, November 23, 2023, which was a court holiday. Friday, November 24, 2023 was also a court holiday. Two court days after November 23, 2023 is Tuesday, November 28, 2023. Plaintiff's responses were served November 28, 2023, and therefore the objections are timely. Defendant's argument confuses court days with calendar days.

As to Requests for Production Nos. 1-2, the motion is granted. Plaintiff argues Defendant 'waived' its right to compel responses to these requests because Defendant had made a prior, broader request for production, to which Plaintiff had responded with objections only, and upon which Defendant never moved to compel. The court is not persuaded. Both requests at issue in this motion are narrower than the prior request. It is entirely proper for a propounding party, upon receipt of an objection to a request, to attempt to propound a more acceptable request by narrowing its scope.

Plaintiff is to serve verified further responses on or before March 29, 2024.

As to Request for Admission Nos. 1-28 and Form Interrogatory No. 17.1, the motion is moot in light of Plaintiff's recently served verified further responses. (ROA 158.) Defendant's request for monetary sanctions is denied. Given that Defendant was not entirely successful on its motion, that Defendant incorrectly asserted Plaintiff had waived all objections by serving untimely responses, and that Plaintiff agreed in her opposition to serve responses to most of the requests, the court finds the opposition was substantially justified. (Code Civ. Proc. §§ 2030.300(d), 2031.310(h), and Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

3041887  4 CASE NUMBER: CASE TITLE:  CASTRO VS SAN DIEGO CONVENTION CENTER  37-2020-00008111-CU-WT-CTL 2033.290(d).) Once confirmed, this ruling shall be the final ruling of the court and no further written order is required.

Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

3041887  4