Judge Theresa M. Traber, Case Number: 23STCV23941, Date: 2024-06-24 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Theresa M. Traber, Case: 23STCV23941, Date: 2024-06-24 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23STCV23941 Hearing Date: June 24, 2024 Dept: 47

Tentative Ruling

Judge Theresa M. Traber, Department 47

HEARING DATE: June 24, 2024 TRIAL DATE: NOT SET

CASE: Emerita del Carmen Munoz v. The Commerce Casino & Hotel

CASE NO.: 23STCV23941

(1) MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION; REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS

(2) MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES; REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS

MOVING PARTY: (1)(2) Defendant California Commerce Club, Inc., erroneously sued as The Commerce Casino & Hotel

RESPONDING PARTY(S): No response on eCourt as of 6/20/24

STATEMENT OF MATERIAL FACTS AND/OR PROCEEDINGS:

This is an action for breach of contract and fraud that was filed on October 2, 2023. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant improperly withheld her winnings from a raffle held at Defendant’s casino.

Defendant moves to compel responses to requests for production and special interrogatories, and for sanctions.

TENTATIVE RULING:

Defendant’s Motion to Compel Responses to Requests for Production is GRANTED.

Defendant’s Motion to Compel Responses to Special Interrogatories is GRANTED.

Plaintiff is ordered to provide verified, code-compliant responses without objections within 30 days of this order.

Defendant’s request for sanctions is GRANTED in the total amount of $703.50. Payment is to be made within 10 days of this order.

DISCUSSION:

Defendant moves to compel responses to requests for production and special interrogatories, and for sanctions.

Legal Standard

When a party to whom an inspection demand or an interrogatory is directed fails to respond, a party making the request may move for an order compelling responses. (Code Civ. Proc. §§ 2030.290(b) [interrogatories]; 2031.300(b) [requests for production].) A party who fails to provide timely responses waives any objection, including one based on privilege or work product. (Code Civ. Proc. §§ 2030.290(a); 2031.300(a).) For a motion to compel initial responses, no meet-and-confer is required. All that must be shown is that a set of requests for production was properly served on the opposing party, that the time to respond has expired, and that no response has been served. (Leach v. Sup. Ct. (1980) 111 Cal.App.3d 902, 905-06.)

Analysis

Defendant served the requests for production and special interrogatories at issue in these motions on Plaintiff on January 4, 2024 via mail. (Declaration of Brian S. Cohen ISO Mot. ¶ 4, Exh. 1.) Although Defendant’s counsel states that Plaintiff contacted his office to discuss the discovery received on January 19, 2024, no response was provided before the February 8, 2024 deadline. (Id. ¶¶ 6-7.) As of the date these motions were filed, no responses have been received. (Id. ¶ 9.) Defendant is therefore entitled to an order compelling the discovery requested.

Sanctions

Defendant requests sanctions against Plaintiff in the amount of $1,331.75 on each motion, for a total of $2,663.50.

Failing to respond or to submit to an authorized method of discovery is a misuse of the discovery process. (Code of Civ. Proc. § 2023.010.) Under California Code of Civil Procedure section 2023.030, subd. (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.”

Sanctions are mandatory in connection with motions to compel responses to interrogatories or requests for production against any party, person, or attorney who unsuccessfully makes or opposes a motion to compel. (Code Civ. Proc. §§ 2030.290(c); 2030.300(d); 2031.300 (c); 2031.310(h).) However, sanctions are not mandatory if 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.” (Id.)

California Rules of Court, rule 3.1348, subdivision (a) states: “The court may award sanctions under the Discovery Act in favor of a party who files a motion to compel discovery, even though no opposition to the motion was filed, or opposition to the motion was withdrawn, or the requested discovery was provided to the moving party after the motion was filed.”

Here, Plaintiffs request an award of $1,331.75 on each motion, accounting for 2 hours of attorney time at $280 per hour incurred attempting to meet and confer with Plaintiff, one hour in preparation of each motion, and 1.5 anticipated hours in making the appearance on the motions, plus $71.75 in filing fees on each motion. (Cohen Decl. ¶10.) The Court declines to award anticipated attorney’s fees not actually incurred, and likewise declines to award attorney’s fees expended on meet and confer efforts which are not mandated on motions to compel initial responses. The Court therefore will award $351.75 on each motion, accounting for one hour of attorney time actually incurred, plus filing fees, for a total of $703.50 in attorney’s fees and costs.

CONCLUSION:

Accordingly, Defendant’s Motion to Compel Responses to Requests for Production is GRANTED.

Defendant’s Motion to Compel Responses to Special Interrogatories is GRANTED.

Plaintiff is ordered to provide verified, code-compliant responses without objections within 30 days of this order.

Defendant’s request for sanctions is GRANTED in the total amount of $703.50. Payment is to be made within 10 days of this order.

Moving Party to give notice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 24, 2024 ___________________________________

Theresa M. Traber

Judge of the Superior Court

Any party may submit on the tentative ruling by contacting the courtroom via email at Smcdept47@lacourt.org by no later than 4:00 p.m. the day before the hearing. All interested parties must be copied on the email. It should be noted that if you submit on a tentative ruling the court will still conduct a hearing if any party appears. By submitting on the tentative you have, in essence, waived your right to be present at the hearing, and you should be aware that the court may not adopt the tentative, and may issue an order which modifies the tentative ruling in whole or in part.