Judge: Serena R. Murillo, Case: 21STCV15987, Date: 2022-08-17 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV15987    Hearing Date: August 17, 2022    Dept: 29

TENTATIVE

Defendant Hannah Isabella Sink’s motions to compel verified responses to form interrogatories, and demand for inspection are GRANTED. Plaintiffs Robert Downey and Liberty Towing Service are ordered to provide verified responses without objections to the request for discovery within 30 days of this order. Defendant’s request for sanctions is GRANTED. The Court imposes sanctions against Plaintiffs Robert Downey and Liberty Towing Service in the amount of $520 to be paid within 30 days of this order.

Legal Standard

Compel Interrogatories

If a party to whom interrogatories are directed fails to serve a timely response, the propounding party may move for an order compelling responses and for a monetary sanction.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.290, subd. (b).) The statute contains no time limit for a motion to compel where no responses have been served. All that need be shown in the moving papers is that a set of interrogatories was properly served on the opposing party, that the time to respond has expired, and that no response of any kind has been served.  (Leach v. Superior Court (1980) 111 Cal.App.3d 902, 905–906.)

Compel RPDs 

Where there has been no timely response to a demand for the production of documents, the demanding party may seek an order compelling a response.  (Code Civ. Proc. § 2031.300(b).)  Failure to timely respond waives all objections, including privilege and work product.  (Code Civ. Proc. § 2031.300(a).)  Thus, unless the party to whom the demand was directed obtains relief from waiver, he or she cannot raise objections to the documents demanded.  There is no deadline for a motion to compel responses.  Likewise, for failure to respond, the moving party need not attempt to resolve the matter outside court before filing the motion. 

Sanctions

Sanctions are mandatory in connection with motions to compel responses to interrogatories and requests for production of documents against any party, person, or attorney who unsuccessfully makes or opposes a motion to compel unless the court “finds that the one subject to the sanction acted with substantial justification or that other circumstances make the imposition of the sanction unjust.”  (Code Civ. Proc. §§ 2030.290(c), 2031.300(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 June 29, 2021, Defendant served Form Interrogatories and Demand for Inspection on Plaintiffs. (Boyd Decl.; Exh. A.) Responses were due 35 days later. After not receiving responses, Defendant granted Plaintiffs several extensions. (Id., Exh. B.) As of the filing of this motion, Plaintiffs have failed to serve responses. (Id. at ¶ 8.)

As Defendant has properly served the discovery requests, and Plaintiffs have not provided any responses, the motions to compel Plaintiffs’ responses are granted. The Court finds Defendant is entitled to a court order directing Plaintiffs to serve verified responses without objections to the discovery requests.

As the motions are granted, Defendant’s requests for sanctions are also granted, but in a reduced amount due to the simplicity of the motions and the concurrent nature of the facts. Thus, the Court imposes sanctions against Plaintiffs in the amount of $520 ($170 per hour x 2 hours, plus $180 in filing fees), to be paid within 30 days of this order.

Conclusion

Accordingly, Defendant’s motions to compel verified responses to form interrogatories, and demand for inspection are GRANTED. Plaintiffs Robert Downey and Liberty Towing Service are ordered to provide verified responses without objections to the request for discovery within 30 days of this order. Defendant’s request for sanctions is GRANTED. The Court imposes sanctions against Plaintiffs Robert Downey and Liberty Towing Service in the amount of $520 to be paid within 30 days of this order.

Moving party is ordered to give notice.