Judge: Ronald F. Frank, Case: 23TRCP00008, Date: 2024-03-08 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23TRCP00008    Hearing Date: March 15, 2024    Dept: 8

Tentative Ruling¿¿ 

¿¿¿ 

HEARING DATE:                    March 15, 2024¿ 

¿¿¿ 

CASE NUMBER:                   23TRCP00008

¿¿ 

CASE NAME:                        Nardiello Law Firm v. John Rodgers, et al.   

¿¿ 

MOVING PARTY:                Plaintiff, Nardiello Law Firm, PLC

¿¿ 

RESPONDING PARTY:        Defendant, John Rodgers (No Opposition)

¿¿¿ 

DISPOSED OF DATE:          May 16, 2023

¿¿¿ 

MOTION:¿                              (1) Motion to Compel Discovery Responses to Post-Judgment Demand for Identification and Production of Documents

                                                (2) Request for Monetary Sanctions

Tentative Rulings:                     (1) GRANTED

                                                (2) Request for Monetary Sanctions GRANTED in the amount of $782.50

I. BACKGROUND¿¿¿ 

¿¿¿ 

A. Factual¿¿¿ 

¿¿¿ 

            On May 16, 2023, this Court entered judgment against Judgment against Judgement Debtor, John Rodgers in favor of Judgment Creditor, Nardiello Law Firm resulting from an arbitrator’s award, for the principal sum of $82,952.62.

            In its moving papers, Plaintiff/Judgment Creditor states that on July 3, 2023, Judgment Creditor’s counsel served a set of Post-Judgment Demands for Identification and Production of Documents upon Judgment Debtor via U.S. First Class mail.  Judgment Creditor also notes it sent the demand to Judgement Debtor’s counsel by email on July 6, 2023. A few days prior to the due date of Judgment Debtor’s responses, Debtor requested an extension of time to respond, which Judgment Granted, allowing an additional two (2) weeks. However, per the moving papers Judgment Debtor nonetheless failed to provide any responses as of the extended deadline, nor any responsive documents as promised.  Judgment Creditor notes that it reached out to Judgment Debtor’s new counsel and provided Judgment Debtor with additional time to respond in hopes of resolving the discovery dispute amicably. However, after further attempts to resolve the overdue discovery response on October 19, 2024 and November 7, 2023, no responses of productions of documents were made by Judgment Debtor.

            As such, Judgment Creditor has filed this Motion to Compel Discovery Responses to Post-Judgment Demand for Identification and Production of Documents, and Request for Monetary Sanctions.

B. Procedural¿¿¿ 

¿¿ 

On February 7, 2024, Plaintiff/Judgment Creditor, Nardiello Law Firm filed this Motion to Compel Discovery Responses to Post-Judgment Demand for Identification and Production of Documents, and Request for Monetary Sanctions. To date, no opposition has been filed.

¿II. ANALYSIS¿¿ 

¿¿ 

A.    Legal Standard

A judgment creditor may demand that any judgment debtor produce and permit the party making the demand to inspect and to copy documents in the possession, custody, or control of the party upon whom the demand is made and in the manner provided by Section 2031.010, et seq. (Code Civ. Proc., § 708.030, subd. (a).) Inspection demands served pursuant to this section may be enforced in the same manner as demands in a civil action. (Code Civ. Proc., § 708.030, subd. (c).)  

A party must respond to requests for production of documents within 30 days after service. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.260, subd. (a); Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.260, subd. (a).) If a party to whom requests for production of documents are directed does not provide timely responses, the requesting party may move for an order compelling responses to the discovery. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.290, subd. (b); Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.300, subd. (c).) The party also waives the right to make any objections, including one based on privilege or work-product protection. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.290, subd. (a); Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.300, subd. (a).) There is no time limit for a motion to compel responses to production of documents other than the cut-off on hearing discovery motions 15 days before trial. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2024.020, subd. (a), 2030.290; Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.300.) No meet and confer efforts are required before filing a motion to compel responses to the discovery. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.290; Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.300; Sinaiko Healthcare Consulting, Inc. v. Pacific Healthcare Consultants (2007) 148 Cal.App.4th 390, 411.)   

B.    Discussion

            Here, Judgment Creditor’s counsel served Judgment Debtor with Post-Judgment Demand for Identification and Production of Documents on July 3, 2023 via U.S. First Class Mail and on Debtor’s counsel by email.  There are 35 categories of documents sought in this Demand for Identification and Production of Documents. Because Judgment Debtor has had over eight (8) months to respond to this discovery, has failed to do so, and has failed to oppose this motion, this Court GRANTS the motion and orders Judgment Debtor’s verified, Code-compliant responses, without objection, to Creditor’s propounded discovery by April 5, 2024, and to produce the responsive documents by that same date.

C.    Sanctions

Sanctions must be imposed against a party who unsuccessfully makes or opposes a motion to compel unless the party acted with a substantial justification or that other circumstances would make the imposition of sanctions unjust.  (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.290, subd. (c), 2031.300, subd. (c); see also Code Civ. Proc., § 708.020, Law Revision Commission Comments [“if the judgment debtor fails to answer interrogatories without substantial justification, sanctions may include an award of attorney’s fees”].) California Rules of Court, rule 3.1348, subdivision (a) states: “[t]he court may award sanctions under the Discovery Act in favor of a party who files a motion to compel discovery, even though no opposition to the motion was filed, or opposition to the motion was withdrawn, or the requested discovery was provided to the moving party after the motion was filed.” 

Here, Plaintiff/Judgment Creditor seeks discovery sanctions in the amount of $782.50 against Judgment Debtor, John Rodgers. This amount is based on counsel for Plaintiff/Judgment Creditor, Jerry Jen, indicating that his hourly rate is $425, spent 1.70 hours on this motion, and a filing fee of $60. The Court finds that this request is properly granted. There is no indication that Judgment Creditor, or his counsel acted with substantial justification or that there are other circumstances that would make an imposition of sanctions unjust. The Court finds that the hourly rate, and the amount of time spent on this motion are both reasonable. As such, the Court GRANTS the awarding of $782.50 in monetary sanctions as against Judgment Debtor, John Rodgers to be paid to Judgment Creditor on or before April 5, 2024.

Plaintiff/Judgment Creditor is ordered to give notice.