Judge Salvatore Sirna, Case Number: 23PSCV00031, Date: 2024-02-01 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Salvatore Sirna, Case: 23PSCV00031, Date: 2024-02-01 Tentative Ruling

The Court may change tentative rulings at any time. Therefore, counsel are advised to check this website periodically to determine whether any changes or updates have been made to the tentative ruling. Counsel may submit on a tentative ruling by calling the clerk in Department G at (909) 802-1104 prior to 8:30 a.m. the morning of the hearing.

Case Number: 23PSCV00031 Hearing Date: February 1, 2024 Dept: G

Plaintiff William Truong’s Motion to Compel Defendant Nhut Kien Vuong to Provide a Verified Response to Form Interrogatories (Set No. One) and Request for Monetary Sanctions

Respondent: Defendant Nhut Kien Vuong

Plaintiff William Truong’s Motion to Compel Defendant Nhut Kien Vuong to Provide a Verified Response to Production Demand (Set No. One) and Request for Monetary Sanctions

Respondent: Defendant Nhut Kien Vuong

Plaintiff William Truong’s Motion to Compel Defendant Nhut Kien Vuong to Provide a Verified Response to Special Interrogatories (Set No. One) and Request for Monetary Sanctions

Respondent: Defendant Nhut Kien Vuong

TENTATIVE RULING

Plaintiff William Truong’s Motion to Compel Defendant Nhut Kien Vuong to Provide a Verified Response to Form Interrogatories (Set No. One) is DENIED AS MOOT. Furthermore, Plaintiff William Truong’s request for sanctions is GRANTED against Defendant Nhut Kien Vuong and sanctions are awarded in the amount of $435, payable within thirty (30) days of the issuance of this order.

Plaintiff William Truong’s Motion to Compel Defendant Nhut Kien Vuong to Provide a Verified Response to Production Demand (Set No. One) is DENIED AS MOOT. Furthermore, Plaintiff William Truong’s request for sanctions is GRANTED against Defendant Nhut Kien Vuong and sanctions are awarded in the amount of $435, payable within thirty (30) days of the issuance of this order.

Plaintiff William Truong’s Motion to Compel Defendant Nhut Kien Vuong to Provide a Verified Response to Special Interrogatories (Set No. One) is DENIED AS MOOT. Furthermore, Plaintiff William Truong’s request for sanctions is GRANTED against Defendant Nhut Kien Vuong and sanctions are awarded in the amount of $435, payable within thirty (30) days of the issuance of this order.

BACKGROUND

This is a personal injury action arising from a motor vehicle collision. In June 2018, Plaintiff William Truong was riding a bicycle within a private residential complex in El Monte when Defendant Nhut Kien Vuong allegedly hit Truong with a motor vehicle.

On January 5, 2023, Truong, through guardian ad litem Tien Nguyen, filed a complaint against Vuong, Dung Van Huynh, Phuong Le Huynh, Daniel Moy, Alice Moy, and Does 1-20, alleging the following causes of action: (1) negligence and (2) premises liability.

On February 16, 2023, Truong amended the Complaint to replace Doe 1 with Defendant Colonial Townhomes HOA (Colonial HOA) and Doe 2 with Defendant Moller Properties, Inc. (Moller).

On April 10, 2023, Vuong filed a cross-complaint against Colonial HOA, Moller, Alice Moy, Daniel Moy, Phuong Le Huynh, and Roes 1-50, alleging the following causes of action: (1) indemnification, (2) apportionment of fault, and (3) declaratory relief.

On April 12, 2023, Colonial HOA filed a cross-complaint against Vuong and Zoes 1-20, alleging the following causes of action: (1) equitable indemnity, (2) contribution, and (3) declaratory relief.

On May 15, 2023, Truong dismissed Daniel and Alice Moy from the present action.

On November 7, 2023, Truong filed the present motions.

On January 12, 2023, Truong dismissed Dung Van Huynh and Phuong Le Huynh from the present action.

A hearing on Truong’s present motions is set for February 1, 2024, along with a case management conference and OSC Re: Default as to Phuong Le Huynh and Moller.

ANALYSIS

Truong moves to compel Vuong to provide verified responses to Truong’s discovery requests. Truong also seeks an award of sanctions for the present motions.

Legal Standard

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 received. Similarly, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 2030.290, subdivision (b), the propounding party may file a motion to compel responses to interrogatories if a 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); § 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).)

Discussion

On April 12, 2023, Truong’s counsel served form interrogatories, special interrogatories, and requests for production on Vuong. (Dunham Decl., ¶ 3.) After no verified responses were provided, Truong’s counsel sent a meet and confer letter to Vuong’s counsel on July 17 that requested full verified responses by July 24. (Dunham Decl., ¶ 4.) No responses were provided and during an informal discovery conference on October 11, the court ordered Vuong to provide verified responses by October 20. (Dunham Decl., ¶ 5; 10/11/2023 Minute Order.) According to Truong’s counsel, Vuong has still failed to provide verified responses. (Dunham Decl., ¶ 5-6.)

In response, Vuong’s counsel filed a declaration stating counsel had located Vuong and will be providing verified responses within two weeks of November 7. (Hess Decl., ¶ 3-7.) On November 28, Vuong’s counsel served discovery responses on Truong. (Nguyen Decl., ¶ 7.) Thus, the court DENIES Truong’s motions as moot. But, because Vuong failed to provide timely discovery responses and because Vuong failed to comply with the court’s order to provided verified responses on or before October 20, the court finds Truong is entitled to monetary sanctions.

Utilizing a lodestar approach and in view of the totality of the circumstances, the court awards sanctions to Truong against Vuong and finds reasonable attorney fees and costs in the amount of $435 for each motion (one hour drafting the present motion and 0.5 hours attending the hearing at an hourly rate of $250/hr, plus a filing fee of $60), payable in thirty (30) days.