Judge: Stephen P. Pfahler, Case: 21CHCV00681, Date: 2022-09-29 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21CHCV00681    Hearing Date: September 29, 2022    Dept: F49

Dept. F-49

Date: 9-29-22

Case # 21CHCV00681

Trial Date: 2-21-23

COMPEL

MOVING PARTY: Defendant/Cross-Complainant, Tessa Charnofsky

RESPONDING PARTY: Unopposed/Plaintiffs/Cross-Defendants, Richard Hajaghaie, et al.[1]

RELIEF REQUESTED:

Motions to Compel Plaintiff to Provide Further Responses to Form and Special Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents

SUMMARY OF ACTION

Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant, Tara International Trading, Inc. and Defendant/Cross-Complainant, Tessa Charnofsky own neighboring real property located at 8469 and 8479 Valley Flores Drive, West Hills. A 10 foot high retaining wall serves as a border wall between the properties. Plaintiff alleges “the foundation of the wall is now protruding onto” plaintiff’s property. Plaintiff also challenges the structural integrity of the wall, which constitutes a personal danger to individual Plaintiff Richard Hajaghaie, the apparent occupant of the home.

Plaintiffs allege the City of Los Angeles Department of Building and Safety issued an “Order to Comply” on Charnofsky, but no repair work has occurred.

On September 2, 2021, Plaintiffs filed a complaint for Injunctive Relief-Nuisance, Negligent Trespass, Negligence, and Declaratory Relief. On December 16, 2021, Defendant answered and filed a cross-complaint for Declaratory Relief, Negligence, Nuisance, Equitable Subrogration, and Breach of Contract.

RECOMMENDED RULING: Granted.

Defendant/Cross-Complainant, Tessa Charnofsky moves to compel further responses to Form Interrogatories, special interrogatories, and request for production of documents from Plaintiffs/Cross-Defendants Richard Hajaghaie and Tara International Trading, Inc.

The items were served on April 13, 2022. Responses in the form of objections were served on June 3, 2022. The motion was timely filed on July 15, 2022.

The responses consist entirely of objections based on relevance, burdensome, privacy, and overbroad. Responding parties also maintain the right to supplement. Charnofsky moves to compel further responses on grounds of invalid objections. The court electronic filing system shows no opposition or reply at the time of the tentative ruling publication cutoff.

The court finds the objections without merit. The unopposed motion is granted. Defendant is ordered to serve complete, verified responses to form and special interrogatories without further objection within ten days in compliance with statutory requirements. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.220, 2030.300, subd. (a), 2031.210, subd. (a)(1-2) 2031.220-230.) Sanctions in the amount of $250 against Plaintiffs/Cross-Defendants and their attorney of record, joint and severally, payable within 30 days. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.300, subd. (d), 2031.310, subd. (h).)

February 21, 2023 trial date to stand.

Charnofsky to give notice.