Judge: Shirley K. Watkins, Case: 21VECV00692, Date: 2023-05-03 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21VECV00692    Hearing Date: May 3, 2023    Dept: T

[TENTATIVE] ORDER: DENIED FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH CRC           3.1345. AND FOR MISREPRESENTATION OF THE EVENTS CONCERNING THIS MOTION.  THE REQUEST FOR MONETARY SANCTIONS BY KHATIBI IS DENIED.  REQUEST FOR MONETARY SANCTIONS GRANTED AGAINST ATTORNEY FARIM FARIVAR AND FARIVAR LAW FIRM, APC, JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY, IN THE SUM OF $1,745.00 PAYABLE NO LATER THAN 6/2/2023 BY CHECK OR MONEY ORDER TO THE CLIENT TRUST ACCOUNT OF SHAFROM & KAMMER, 4764 PARK GRANADA, SUITE 210, CALABASAS, CA 91302 FOR DISCOVERY ABUSE WITHOUT SUBSTANTIAL JUSTIFICATION PER CCP SECTION 2023.010.

Cross-complainant Richard Khatibi (Khatibi) filed a motion on 3/27/2023 seeking an order compelling Cross-Defendant Shabnam Akhoundzadeh (Akhoundzadeh) to provide "substantive responses" to Khatibi's Request for Production of Documents, Set 1 (RFP1) and for sanctions.

RFP1 were served on 10/21/2021.  Verified Responses were served 6/13/2022.  Verified Amended Responses were served by email on 12/27/2022.  The time to file a motion to compel as to those responses expired 47 days after service.  Verified Further Amended Responses were served 2/6/2023 only as to RFP#s 2, 7, 14, 21, 37,  38,  40,  84,  85,  86,  88,  90, and 91.  This motion insofar as it seeks an order only as to RFP#s 2, 7, 14, 21, 37,  38,  40,  84,  85,  86,  88,  90, and 91 is timely.

A Separate Statement was required to accompany the Motion pursuant to CRC 3.1345, which specifies:

"(c) Contents of separate statement

A separate statement is a separate document filed and served with the discovery motion that provides all the information necessary to understand each discovery request and all the responses to it that are at issue. The separate statement must be full and complete so that no person is required to review any other document in order to determine the full request and the full response. Material must not be incorporated into the separate statement by reference. The separate statement must include-for each discovery request (e.g., each interrogatory, request for admission, deposition question, or inspection demand) to which a further response, answer, or production is requested-the following:

(1)  The text of the request, interrogatory, question, or inspection demand;

(2)  The text of each response, answer, or objection, and any further responses or answers;

(3)  A statement of the factual and legal reasons for compelling further responses, answers, or production as to each matter in dispute;

(4)  If necessary, the text of all definitions, instructions, and other matters required to understand each discovery request and the responses to it;

(5)  If the response to a particular discovery request is dependent on the response given to another discovery request, or if the reasons a further response to a particular discovery request is deemed necessary are based on the response to some other discovery request, the other request, and the response to it must be set forth; and

(6)  If the pleadings, other documents in the file, or other items of discovery are relevant to the motion, the party relying on them must summarize each relevant document." (EMPHASIS ADDED.)

            A Separate Statement accompanied the instant motion but it fails to set forth the text of each response, answer or objection, and any further responses or answers.  Only part of the responses are cited, thereby misstating the events of this motion.

            Because the Separate Statement violates the requirements of CRC 3.1345, the motion is denied on that ground.  Additionally, the history of the events concerning this discovery has been misstated in the moving papers and declaration of Mr. Farivar, further supporting the grant of attorney fees for discovery abuse without substantial justification pursuant to CCP section 2023.010.  The amount requested, however, for the opposition was grossly excessive, overreaching, and unnecessary.  The court awards 3 hours x $395 an hour and 1 hour x $560 an hour for a total of $1,745.00 as a reasonable fees for opposing this motion.

IT IS SO ORDERED, NOTICE BY CLERK OF THE COURT.