Judge: Robert S. Draper, Case: 21STCV46620, Date: 2022-09-28 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 21STCV46620 Hearing Date: September 28, 2022 Dept: 78
Superior Court of
California
County of Los Angeles
Department 78
|
NELSON OCHOA, Plaintiff, vs. SUPRA
NATIONAL EXPRESS, INC., et al., Defendants. |
Case
No.: |
21STCV46620 |
|
Hearing
Date: |
September
28, 2022 |
|
|
|
||
|
[TENTATIVE]
RULING RE: Plaintiff nelson ochoa’s motion to deem requests
for admission admitted as to defendants supra national express, inc. and
daniel linares; plaintiff nelson ochoa’s request for monetary sanctions |
||
Plaintiff Nelson Ochoa’s Motion to Deem Requests for Admission
Admitted as to Defendants Supra National Express, Inc, and Daniel Linares is GRANTED.
Plaintiff Nelson Ochoa’s Request for Monetary Sanctions is GRANTED
in the amount of $1,468.91 as
to Defendants Linares and Supra only.
Factual
background
This
is an action for breach of contract. The complaint alleges as follows.
Plaintiff Nelson Ochoa (“Ochoa”) filed suit against
Defendant Supra National Express, Inc. (“Supra”) alleging various violations of
the California Labor Code. (Compl. ¶ 12.) On January 27, 2020, the parties
entered into a written settlement agreement. (Compl. ¶ 14.) Defendants agreed
to pay Ochoa $400,000 in exchange for his dismissing the action. (Compl. ¶ 16.)
Defendants are more than $275,000 behind on the settlement payments. (Compl. ¶
19.)
PROCEDURAL
HISTORY
On December 22, 2021, Ochoa filed the Complaint.
On March 28, 2022, Defendants filed the Answer.
On July 19, 2022, this Court granted Attorney Miles
Kavalier’s Motion to be Relieved as Counsel for Defendants Daniel Linares and
Supra National Express, Inc.
On July 27, 2022, Ochoa filed the instant Motion to Deem
Plaintiff’s First Set of Requests for Admission Admitted as to Defendants Daniel
Linares and Supra National Express, Inc.
No Opposition has been filed.
DISCUSSION
Plaintiff
Nelson Ochoa moves the Court to deem Plaintiff’s First Request for Admission Admitted
as to Defendants Daniel Linares and Supra National Express, Inc (together,
“Defendants”), and for a monetary sanction against Defendants and Defendants’ Counsel.
Pursuant to Code of
Civil Procedure section 2033.280, subdivision (b), a “party may move for an
order that the genuineness of any documents and the truth of any matters
specified in the requests be deemed admitted, as well as for a monetary
sanction under Chapter 7 (commencing with section 2023.010).” The court
“shall” grant the motion to deem requests for admission admitted “unless it
finds that the party to whom the requests for admission have been directed has
served, before the hearing on the motion, a proposed response to the requests
for admission that is in substantial compliance with Section
2033.220.” (Code Civ. Proc. § 2033.280(c).)
Monetary sanctions are
mandatory against a party, attorney, or both whose failure to serve a timely
response to requests for admission necessitated the motion. (Code Civ.
Proc., § 2033.280(c).)
Here, Plaintiff notes
that he propounded his first set of Requests for Admission on Defendants on February
28, 2022. (Friedman Decl., ¶ 4.) On May 13, 2022, Defendants requested an
extension on serving objection free responses, nearly two months after said
responses were originally due. (Friedman Decl., ¶ 5.) Plaintiff agreed to
extend the deadline to June 10, 2022. (Ibid.)
Although over a month
has passed since the extended deadline, Defendants have still yet to serve any
responses. (Friedman Decl., ¶ 6.)
Accordingly, pursuant
to Civil Procedure section 2033.280(c), Ochoa’s
Motion to Deem Defendants’ Requests for Admission Admitted is GRANTED.
Additionally, pursuant
to section 203.280(c), monetary sanctions are mandatory against Defendants and
Defendants’ Counsel.
However, as Defendants
were without representation at the time the instant motion was filed, the Court
finds that in the interest of fairness, sanctions are warranted against
Defendants only, and not Defendants’ former counsel.
In addition, the Court
notes that Ochoa’s calculated attorney fees include thirty minutes allotted for
reviewing an Opposition, and thirty minutes for preparing a Reply. (Friedman
Decl., ¶ 7.)
As no Opposition was
filed in this matter, the Court will subtract one hour from Ochoa’s proposed
attorney fees. As Attorney Friedman’s reasonable hourly rate is $700, this
makes the total amount of reasonable attorney fees and costs $1,468.91.
Accordingly, Ochoa’s
request for attorney fees is GRANTED in the amount of $1,468.91 as to
Defendants Linares and Supra National Express, only.
DATED:
September 28, 2022
____________________________
Hon. Robert S. Draper
Judge of the Superior Court