Judge: Stephen P. Pfahler, Case: 24STCV02235, Date: 2024-12-09 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24STCV02235    Hearing Date: December 9, 2024    Dept: 68

Dept. 68

Date: 12-9-24

Case #: 24STCV02235

Trial Date: 4-14-25

FORM INTERROGATORIES

MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff, Altman Apartments, LLC

RESPONDING PARTY: Defendant, PATH

RELIEF REQUESTED

Motion to Compel Responses to Form Interrogatories (set one)

SUMMARY OF ACTION

Plaintiff Altman Apartments, LLC (Altman) manages certain residential properties in Los Angeles. Plaintiff alleges an agreement with Defendant People Assisting the Homeless (PATH) for the placement of qualified individuals and families into Altman managed units in exchange for certain negotiated rates. Plaintiff alleges payments stopped for certain tenants, thereby leaving an outstanding balance of $335,323.44.

On January 29, 2024, Plaintiff filed a complaint for 1. Breach Of Contracts; 2. Breach of Contract; 3. Common Count: Account Stated; 4. Common Count: Open Book Account; 5. Common Count: Account Stated; 6. Common Count: Open Book Account; and 7. Negligence. On March 11, 2024, PATH answered the complaint, and filed a cross-complaint against Altman for Indemnification, Apportionment of Fault, and Declaratory Relief. Altman answered the cross-complaint on March 13, 2024.

RULING: Granted.

Plaintiff Altman Apartments, LLC (Altman) moves to compel responses to Form Interrogatories (set one) served on Defendant People Assisting the Homeless (PATH). Plaintiff served Form Interrogatories (set one) on April 5, 2024. [Declaration of Thomas Vincent, ¶ 2, Ex. A.] At the time of the filing of the motion, no responses were received. [Id., ¶ 5.] Defendant in opposition represents that former handling counsel left the firm on short notice, thereby requiring reassignment of the cases. [Declaration of Serena Nervez, ¶ 3.] Upon discovering the motion and missing discovery responses counsel proceeded to prepare responses and represents service of responses by the time of the hearing date. [Id., ¶ 6.] On reply, Plaintiff indicates that it has not received any responses to the subject discovery. [Reply at p. 2:21-26.]

Because the opposition lacks proof of service of any responses, and only presents a representation of responses to be served by the time of the hearing, the court must grant the motion. Barring a showing of service of responses or acknowledgment by Plaintiff at the time of the hearing, Defendant PATH is ordered to serve verified responses to form interrogatories, without objections within ten days. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.290, subd. (a-b).)

If responses are determined served at the time of the motion, the court will declare the motion moot. The court will not consider the quality of any responses under this situation. (See Sinaiko Healthcare Consulting, Inc. v. Pacific Healthcare Consultants (2007) 148 Cal.App.4th 390, 408–409.) Plaintiff may bring a motion to compel further responses, if deemed necessary.

The court appreciates the circumstances, but generally adheres to a policy of sanctions when a valid motion only leads to responses after the filing of the motion. Sanctions in the amount of $250, whether responses are served or not. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.290, subd. (c).) Sanctions are imposed joint and severally against both counsel and PATH in the amount of $250 and payable within 30 days of this order.

Second motions to compel discovery on December 10, 2024. Trial set for April 14, 2025.

Plaintiff to give notice.