Judge: Serena R. Murillo, Case: 20STCV44239, Date: 2023-04-24 Tentative Ruling
DEPARTMENT 29 - LAW AND MOTION RULINGS IMPORTANT (PLEASE SEND YOUR E-MAIL TO DEPT. 29 NOT DEPT. 2)
Communicating with the Court Staff re the Tentative Ruling 1. Please notify the courtroom staff by email not later than 9:30 a.m. on the day of the hearing if you wish to submit on the tentative ruling rather than argue the motion. The email address is SSCDEPT29@lacourt.org. Please do not use any other email address. 2. You must include the other parties on the email by "cc." 3. Include the word "SUBMISSION" in all caps in the Subject line and include your name, contact information, the case number, and the party you represent in the body of the email. If you submit on the tentative and elect not to appear at the hearing, the opposing party may nevertheless appear at the hearing and argue the motions. THE COURT WILL HEAR ARGUMENT UNLESS BOTH SIDES SUBMIT ON THE TENTATIVE. 4. Include the words "SUBMISSION BUT WILL APPEAR" if you submit, but one or both parties will nevertheless appear. 5. For other communications with Court Staff a. OFF-CALENDAR should appear in all caps in the Subject line where all parties have agreed to have a matter placed off-calendar. All counsel should be cc'ed (and where appropriate parties not represented by counsel) and the body of the email should state: (a) name and case number; (b) date of proceeding. b. CASE SETTLED should appear in all caps in the Subject line where all parties have agreed that the case has settled for all purposes. All counsel should be cc'ed (and where appropriate parties not represented by counsel) and the body of the email should state: (a) name and case number; (b) whether notice of settlement/dismissal documents have been filed; (c) if (b) has not been done, a date one year from the date of your email which will be a date set by the court for an OSC for dismissal of the case. c. STIPULATION should appear in all caps in the Subject line where all parties have stipulated that a matter before the court can be postponed. All counsel should be cc'ed (and where appropriate parties not represented by counsel) and the body of the email should state: (a) name and case number; (b) what proceeding is agreed to be postponed e.g. Trial, FSC; (c) the agreed-upon future date; (d) whether all parties waive notice if the Court informs all counsel/parties that the agreed-upon date is satisfactory. This communication should be used only for matters that are agreed to be postponed and not for orders shortening time. 6. PLEASE MAKE SURE THAT ALL COMMUNICATIONS WITH COURT STAFF DEAL ONLY WITH SCHEDULING AND ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS AND DO NOT DISCUSS THE MERITS OF ANY CASE. (UPDATED 6/17/2020)
IMPORTANT: In light of the COVID-19 emergency, the Court encourages all parties to appear remotely. The capacity in the courtroom is extremely limited. The Court appreciates the cooperation of counsel and the litigants.
ALSO NOTE: If the moving party does not contact the court to submit on the tentative and does not appear (either remotely or in person), the motion will be taken off calendar. THE TENTATIVE RULING WILL NOT BE THE ORDER OF THE COURT.
Case Number: 20STCV44239 Hearing Date: April 24, 2023 Dept: 29
TENTATIVE
Defendants Daniel Frank and Kristin Norton’s unopposed motions to have matters in requests for
admissions deemed admitted is GRANTED. Defendants are entitled to an order
establishing the truth of the matters in their request for admissions, set one,
served on Plaintiff. Defendants’ request for sanctions is DENIED.
Legal Standard
“If a party to
whom requests for admission are directed fails to serve a timely response, the
following rules apply: (b) The requesting 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…. The Court, on motion, may relieve that party from
this waiver on its determination that both of the following conditions are
satisfied: (1) The party has subsequently served a response that is in
substantial compliance with Sections 2033.210, 2033.220, and 2033.230. (2) the
party’s failure to serve a timely response was the result of mistake,
inadvertence, or excusable neglect…. (c) The court shall make this order,
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.
Sanctions
Sanctions are mandatory in connection with a motion to deem matters
specified in a request for admissions as true. (Code Civ. Proc. Section
2033.280(c).)
Under CCP section 2023.030(a), “[t]he court may
impose a monetary sanction ordering that one engaging in the misuse of the
discovery process, or any attorney advising that conduct, or both pay the
reasonable expenses, including attorney’s fees, incurred by anyone as a result
of that conduct. . . . If a monetary sanction is authorized by any provision of
this title, the court shall impose that sanction unless it finds that the one
subject to the sanction acted with substantial justification or that other
circumstances make the imposition of the sanction unjust.” Failing to
respond or to submit to an authorized method of discovery is a misuse of the
discovery process. (Code Civ. Proc. § 2023.010.)
Discussion
On July 19, 2022, Defendants
Kristin Norton and Daniel Frank each served upon Plaintiff Emily Lucitt,
Request for Admissions, Set One, propounded by Defendant Kristin Norton (Slack
Decl., Exh. A.) Defendants granted Plaintiff an extension to November 1, 2022,
to respond to Defendants' discovery. To date, no responses to the discovery were provided. (Id., ¶ f.)
As Defendants
properly served the discovery requests and Plaintiff failed to provide any
responses, the Court finds Defendants are entitled to an order establishing the
truth of the matters in both Defendants’ request for admissions served on
Plaintiff. Therefore, the motions are granted.
As
to sanctions, CCP section 2023.040 states that: “A request for a sanction shall, in the notice of motion,
identify every person, party, and attorney against whom the sanction is sought,
and specify the type of sanction sought.”
Defendants’ notice of motion does not identify who they are seeking sanctions
against. Thus, the request is denied as the notice is defective.
Conclusion
Accordingly, Defendants’ motions
to have matters in requests for admissions deemed admitted is
GRANTED. Defendants are entitled to an order establishing the truth of the
matters in their request for admissions, set one, served on Plaintiff.
Defendants’ request for sanctions is DENIED.
Moving party is ordered to give
notice.