Judge: Thomas D. Long, Case: 23STCV10746, Date: 2024-05-30 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23STCV10746    Hearing Date: May 30, 2024    Dept: 48

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

On March 22, 2024, Plaintiff Isabel Kilroe served Requests For Production of Documents, Special Interrogatories, Form Interrogatories, and Requests for Admissions on Defendant FCA US LLC.  Defendant did not serve responses.

On May 3, 2024 and May 7, 2024, Plaintiff filed three motions to compel Defendant’s responses and one motion to deem the RFAs admitted.  Each motion also requested sanctions.

Where a party fails to serve timely responses to discovery requests, the Court may make an order compelling responses.  (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.290, 2031.300; Healthcare Consulting, Inc. v. Pacific Healthcare Consultants (2007) 148 Cal.App.4th 390, 403.)   A party that fails to serve timely responses waives any objections to the request, including ones based on privilege or the protection of attorney work product.  (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.290, subd. (a), 2031.300, subd. (a).) 

When a party fails to timely respond to a request for admission, the propounding party may move for an order that the genuineness of any documents and the truth of any matters specified in the requests be deemed admitted.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.280, subd. (b).)  The party who failed to respond waives any objections to the demand, unless the court grants them relief from the waiver, upon a showing that the party (1) has subsequently served a substantially compliant response, and (2) that the party’s failure to respond was the result of mistake, inadvertence, or excusable neglect.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.280, subds. (a)(1)-(2).)  The court shall grant a motion to deem admitted requests for admissions, “unless it finds that the party to whom the requests for admission have been directed has served, before the hearing on the motion, a proposed response to the requests for admission that is in substantial compliance with Section 2033.220.”  (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.280, subd. (c).)

Defendant did not serve responses to Plaintiff’s discovery and filed no oppositions to these motions.

The motions to compel are GRANTED.  Defendant is ORDERED to serve verified responses, without objections, to Plaintiff’s Requests For Production of Documents, Special Interrogatories, and Form Interrogatories within 30 days of this order.

The motion to deem RFAs admitted is also GRANTED.  Plaintiff’s Request for Admissions is deemed admitted by Defendant.

The requests for sanctions are GRANTED IN PART.  The Court determines that sanctions are appropriately imposed against counsel, not the client, because no oppositions were filed and no explanation was provided for the failure to timely respond to discovery.  Defendant’s counsel is ORDERED to pay sanctions of $4,000.00 to Plaintiff within 30 days.

Moving party to give notice.

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at SMCDEPT48@lacourt.org indicating intention to submit.  If all parties in the case submit on the tentative ruling, no appearances before the Court are required unless a companion hearing (for example, a Case Management Conference) is also on calendar.

         Dated this 30th day of May 2024