Judge: Salvatore Sirna, Case: 21PSCV00742, Date: 2022-10-11 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 21PSCV00742 Hearing Date: October 11, 2022 Dept: A
Defendant Kent Edward Buckley’s MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION, SET ONE
Respondent: NO OPPOSITION (Plaintiff Martha Buckley)
Defendant Kent Edward Buckley’s MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO FORM INTERROGATORIES, SET TWO
Respondent: NO OPPOSITION (Plaintiff Martha Buckley)
Defendant Kent Edward Buckley’s MOTION TO DEEM THE TRUTH OF MATTERS SPECIFIED IN REQUESTS FOR ADMISSIONS, SET ONE, ADMITTED
Respondent: NO OPPOSITION (Plaintiff Martha Buckley)
Defendant Kent Edward Buckley’s MOTION TO DEEM THE TRUTH OF MATTERS SPECIFIED IN REQUESTS FOR ADMISSIONS, SET TWO, ADMITTED
Respondent: NO OPPOSITION (Plaintiff Martha Buckley)
1. Defendant Kent Edward Buckley’s motion to compel responses to requests for production, set one, is GRANTED. Sanctions are awarded in the reasonable amount of $311.65, payable within 30 days.
2. Defendant Kent Edward Buckley’s motion to compel responses to form interrogatories, set two, is GRANTED. Sanctions are awarded in the reasonable amount of $311.65, payable within 30 days.
3. Defendant Kent Edward Buckley’s motion to deem the truth of matters specified in requests for admissions, set one, admitted is GRANTED. Sanctions are awarded in the reasonable amount of $261.65, payable within 30 days.
4. Defendant Kent Edward Buckley’s motion to deem the truth of matters specified in requests for admissions, set two, admitted is GRANTED. Sanctions are awarded in the reasonable amount of $261.65, payable within 30 days.
II BACKGROUND
Plaintiff alleges that the Defendant, her son, erroneously received a joint tenancy interest in Plaintiff’s property and has refused to transfer his interest to her. The First Amended Complaint, filed February 4, 2022, asserts causes of action for:
1. Quiet title
2. Slander of title
3. Nuisance
4. Unjust enrichment
After the court overruled the Defendant’s demurrer and motion to strike, Defendant filed an answer on May 3, 2022. After propounding certain discovery, Defendant filed the following discovery motions:
Motion to Compel Responses to Requests for Production, Set One (Filed 8/24/22, Hearing on 10/10/22, reset to 10/11/22 by 8/26/22 order)
Motion to Compel Responses to Form Interrogatories, Set One (Filed 8/24/22, Hearing on 10/5/22)
Motion to Compel Responses to Special Interrogatories, Set One (Filed 8/24/22, hearing on 10/6/22, reset to 10/5/22 by 8/26/22 order)
Motion to Compel Responses to Form Interrogatories, Set Two (Filed 8/24/22, hearing on 10/11/22)
Motion to Deem the Truth of Matters Specified in Requests for Admissions, Set Two, Admitted (Filed 8/24/22, hearing on 10/11/22)
Motion to Deem the Truth of Matters Specified in Requests for Admissions, Set One, Admitted (Filed 8/25/22, hearing on 10/10/22, reset to 10/11/22 by 8/26/22 order)
III ANALYSIS
A. Motions to Compel
Defendant moves to compel Plaintiff to provide verified responses to his request for production, set one, and form interrogatories, set two. Defendant also seeks monetary sanctions of $1,761.65 in each of these two motions against Plaintiff and/or Plaintiff’s counsel.
Code of Civil Procedure section 2031.300, subdivision (b) allows the propounding party to file a motion to compel responses to requests for production if a response has not been timely received. Similarly, pursuant to section 2030.290, subdivision (b), the propounding party may file a motion to compel responses to interrogatories if a timely response has not been received.
In both cases, a response must be provided within 30 days of service. (Code Civ. Proc. § 2030.260, subd. (a) and § 2031.260, subd. (a).) If responses are untimely, the responding party waives objections. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.290, subd. (a); 2031.300, subd. (a).) The court shall impose monetary sanctions against any party, person, or attorney who unsuccessfully makes or opposes such orders to compel absent substantial justification or other circumstances that make imposition of sanctions unjust. (Code Civ. Proc. §§ 2030.290, subd. (c); 2031.300, subd. (c).) While the imposition of sanctions is mandatory, the court “has discretion to reduce the amount of fees and costs requested as a discovery sanction in order to reach a reasonable award.” (Cornerstone Realty Advisors, LLC v. Summit Healthcare Reit, Inc. (2020) 56 Cal.App.5th 771, 791 (Cornerstone).)
On July 13, 2022, Defendant personally served Plaintiff with his Requests for Production, Set One. (Motion Compel Production (Set One Motion), Little Decl., ¶ 2.) On July 22, Defendant also personally served Plaintiff with his Form Interrogatories, Set Two. (Motion Compel Interrogatories (Set Two Motion), Little Decl., ¶ 2.) Responses for the requests for production were due on August 12, 2022, and responses to the form interrogatories were due on August 21, 2022. Defendant did not receive responses to either request. (Set One Motion, Little Decl., ¶ 4; Set Two Motion, Little Decl., ¶ 4.) The court notes that Defendant is not required to meet and conferred with Plaintiff regarding the failure to provide timely responses before seeking orders to compel. (Sinaiko Healthcare Consulting, Inc. v. Pacific Healthcare Consultants (2007) 148 Cal.App.4th 390, 404.) The court is not in receipt of any opposition from Plaintiff.
Defendant requests sanctions in the amount of $1,761.65 for each motion including a filing fee of $61.65 as well as 1 hour of file review and research, 1.5 hours reviewing opposition and preparing a reply, and 1.5 hours appearing at the hearing for the motion at an hourly rate of $425. (Set One Motion, Little Decl., ¶ 5; Set Two Motion, Little Decl., ¶ 5.)
Both of the Defendant’s motions are GRANTED. Utilizing a Loadstar approach, and considering the totality of the circumstances, the court awards sanctions and determines reasonable fees in the amount of $311.65 for each motion ($61.65 in filing fees plus 1 hour for drafting the motion and 15 minutes for attending the hearing at the rate of $200/hour).
A. Motions to Deem Admitted