Judge: Serena R. Murillo, Case: 22STCV18607, Date: 2023-03-24 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 22STCV18607 Hearing Date: March 24, 2023 Dept: 29
TENTATIVE
Plaintiff Sabrina Forby’s unopposed motions to compel responses to form
interrogatories, special interrogatories, request for production, and to deem
matters admitted in requests for admission are GRANTED. Defendant Andrew
Eugene Jones is ordered to provide verified responses without objections to the
discovery requests within 30 days of this order. The truth of the matters in
the request for admissions, set one, served on Defendant are admitted.
Plaintiff’s request for sanctions is GRANTED.
Defendant
Andrew Eugene Jones and counsel of record Christopher W. Dull are ordered to pay sanctions to Plaintiff in the
amount of $684.95, jointly
and severally, within 30 days of this order.
Plaintiff is
ordered to pay $60 for the filing fee of the additional motion.
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.)
Deem RFAs
Admitted
“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.
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 a motion to deem matters
specified in a request for admissions as true and 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),
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 1, 2022, Plaintiff served
Form Interrogatories, Set One; Special Interrogatories, Set One; Request for
Production of Documents, Set One; and Requests for Admissions, Set One on Defendant.
(Vardanyan Decl., ¶ 2; Exh. A.) Defendant’s responses were due on August 22,
2022, after an extension to respond was granted. (Id, Exh. C.) Defendant has
not served responses to the discovery in question. (Id., ¶ 5.)
As Plaintiff properly
served discovery requests and Defendant failed to provide responses, the Court
finds Plaintiff is entitled to a court order directing Defendant to provide
verified responses without objections to the discovery requests served on Defendant.
The Court also finds Plaintiff is entitled to an order establishing the truth
of the matters in the request for admissions served on Plaintiff. Therefore,
the motions are granted.
As the motions are granted, Plaintiff’s
request for sanctions is also granted, but in reduced hours due to the simplicity of the motions and the nature of
the concurrent facts. Thus, the Court orders Defendant and counsel of record
Christopher W. Dull to pay monetary sanctions in the amount of $684.95 ($250
per hour, for two hours, plus $184.95 in filing fees), jointly and severally, within
30 days of this order.
However,
Plaintiff has only filed 3 motions for 4 sets of discovery. As such, Plaintiff
is ordered to pay $60 for the filing fee of the additional motion.
Conclusion
Accordingly, Plaintiff’s
motions to compel responses to form interrogatories, special interrogatories,
request for production, and to deem matters admitted in requests for admission
are GRANTED. Defendant is ordered to provide verified responses without
objections to the discovery requests within 30 days of this order. The truth of
the matters in the request for admissions, set one, served on Defendant are
admitted.
Plaintiff’s request for sanctions is GRANTED.
Defendant
and counsel of record Christopher W.
Dull are ordered to pay sanctions to Plaintiff in the amount of $684.95, jointly and severally, within 30 days of
this order.
Moving party is ordered to give notice.