Judge Stephen I. Goorvitch, Case 20STCV06289 2022-08-19 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Stephen I. Goorvitch, Case: 20STCV06289, Date: 2022-08-19 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 20STCV06289 Hearing Date: August 19, 2022 Dept: 39

Jimmy H. Lee, et al. v. Jeffrey Liyano

Case No. 20STCV06289

Motions to Compel and Motion to Deem Admitted

[TENTATIVE] ORDER

The Court posts this tentative order in advance of the hearing. The Court provides notice that if Plaintiffs do not appear at the hearing, either in person or remotely, they shall waive the right to be heard, and the Court shall adopt this tentative order without a further hearing.

Plaintiffs Jimmy H. Lee and Kyong Lee (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) filed this action following damage to a retaining wall dividing three separate properties: (1) Plaintiffs’ property (the “New Hampshire Avenue property”), (2) Property owned by Defendants Jeffrey and Shirley Liyanto until February 2019, when they transferred the property to Defendant Britestone Berendo Holdings, LLC (the “South Berendo Street property”), and (3) Property owned and managed by Defendant Marina Sea View Holdings, LLC, which is located on San Marino Street (the “San Merino Street property”). Plaintiffs assert the following causes of action: (1) Negligence/Violation of Civil Code section 832 for failing to maintain the retaining wall, (2) Negligent Removal of Lateral Support, (3) Declaratory Relief, and (4) Injunctive Relief.

Defendant Elden Development Construction, Inc. (“Defendant”) has filed five discovery motions against Plaintiffs: (1) Motion to Deem the Requests for Admission (“RFAs”) served on Plaintiff Kyong Lee to be admitted; (2) Motion to Compel Further Responses to Request for Production, Set One (“RPDs”), from Plaintiff Kyong Lee; (3) Motion to Compel Further Responses to the RPDs from Plaintiff Jimmy H. Lee; (4) Motion to Compel Further Responses to Special Interrogatories, Set One (“SROGs”) from Plaintiff Kyong Lee; and (5) Motion to Compel Further Responses to the SROGs from Plaintiff Jimmy H. Lee. Plaintiffs have not opposed the motions.

The Court rules as follows:

1. Motion to Deem the RFAs Admitted against Plaintiff Kyong Lee – GRANTED. Defendant served the RFAs on December 20, 2021, by mail. Plaintiff failed to provide a timely response. Therefore, the motion is granted, and Plaintiff Kyong Lee is deemed to have admitted all matters specified in the RFAs. Defendant requests sanctions in the amount of $1,950. Sanctions are mandatory on such a motion. Therefore, the Court orders Plaintiff Kyong Lee to pay sanctions in the amount of $900 based upon four hours of attorney time at a rate of $210 per hour plus a filing fee of $60.

2. Motion to Compel Further Responses from Plaintiff Kyong Lee to RPDs – GRANTED. Plaintiff Kyong Lee’s responses do not comply with Code of Civil Procedure section 2031.230, which explains what information must be included in a statement of inability to comply. Therefore, the motion is granted. Defendant requests sanctions in the amount of $900. The Court finds that Plaintiffs’ responses are insufficient, and she has abused the discovery process. Therefore, the Court orders Plaintiff Kyong Lee to pay sanctions in the amount of $480 based upon two hours of attorney time at a rate of $210 per hour plus a filing fee of $60.

3. Motion to Compel Further Responses from Plaintiff Jimmy Lee to RPDs – GRANTED. Plaintiff Jimmy Lee’s responses do not comply with Code of Civil Procedure section 2031.230, which explains what information must be included in a statement of inability to comply. Therefore, the motion is granted. Defendant requests sanctions in the amount of $480. The Court finds that Plaintiffs’ responses are insufficient, and he has abused the discovery process. Therefore, the Court orders Plaintiff Jimmy Lee to pay sanctions in the amount of $480 based upon two hours of attorney time at a rate of $210 per hour plus a filing fee of $60.

4. Motion to Compel Further Responses from Plaintiff Kyong Lee to SROGs – GRANTED. Plaintiff Kyong Lee’s responses are not “complete and straightforward,” and do not actually address the interrogatories, as required by Code of Civil procedure section 2030.220. Therefore, the motion is granted. Defendant requests sanctions in the amount of $900. The Court finds that Plaintiffs’ responses are insufficient, and she has abused the discovery process. Therefore, the Court orders Plaintiff Kyong Lee to pay sanctions in the amount of $480 based upon two hours of attorney time at a rate of $210 per hour plus a filing fee of $60.

5. Motion to Compel Further Responses from Plaintiff Jimmy Lee to SROGs – GRANTED. Plaintiff Jimmy Lee’s responses are not “complete and straightforward,” and do not actually address the interrogatories, as required by Code of Civil procedure section 2030.220. Therefore, the motion is granted. Defendant requests sanctions in the amount of $480. The Court finds that Plaintiffs’ responses are insufficient, and he has abused the discovery process. Therefore, the Court orders Plaintiff Jimmy Lee to pay sanctions in the amount of $480 based upon two hours of attorney time at a rate of $210 per hour plus a filing fee of $60.

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

1. The Court grants Defendant’s motion to deem the matters specified in the RFAs admitted. Plaintiff Kyong Lee is deemed to have admitted all matters specified in the RFAs.

2. The Court grants Defendant’s motions to compel further responses to the RPDs and SROGs. Plaintiffs Kyong Lee and Jimmy Lee shall provide code-compliant further responses, without objections, to the RPDs and SROGs—with a separate verification page for each set of discovery—within thirty (30) days.

3. The Court orders Plaintiff Kyong Lee to pay $1,860 in discovery sanctions within thirty (30) days.

4. The Court orders Plaintiff Jimmy Lee to pay $960 in discovery sanctions within thirty (30) days.

5. Defendant’s counsel shall provide notice and file proof of such with the Court.