Judge: Thomas S. Mcconville, Case: 2019-01118801, Date: 2023-05-22 Tentative Ruling

Defendant Sharona Zahabian has two discovery motions on calendar: (1) Motion to Compel Further Responses to Form Interrogatories, Set No. Two, and Request for Sanctions; and (2) Motion to Compel Further Responses to Special Interrogatories, Set No. Two, and Request for Sanctions.  Plaintiff Ahmad Hajj has filed an opposition to the motions arguing that none of the discovery has anything to do with this instant case. 

Code of Civil Procedure § 2030.250(a) requires that the responding party sign responses to interrogatories under oath unless the response contains only objections. Where a verification is required, an unverified response is ineffective; it is the equivalent of no response at all. (See Appleton v. Sup.Ct. (Cook) (1988) 206 Cal.App.3d 632, 636; Allen-Pacific, Ltd. v. Sup.Ct. (Chan) (1997) 57 Cal.App.4th 1546, 1550-1551 (disapproved on other grounds by Wilcox v. Birtwhistle (1999) 21 Cal.4th 973, 983, fn. 12).)

First, with regard to Form Interrogatory No. 1, it is unverified.  As noted above, unverified responses are tantamount to no response whatsoever.  Therefore, Plaintiff’s response to Form Interrogatory No. 1.1 is tantamount to no response whatsoever and a verified response is required.

Second, responses that contain only objections, such as the remainder of the discovery at issue, do not need to be verified.  If a timely motion to compel has been filed, the burden is on the responding party to justify any objection or failure fully to answer the interrogatories. (Coy v. Superior Court (1962) 58 Cal.2d 210, 220-21; Fairmont Ins. Co. v. Superior Court (2000) 22 Cal.4th 245, 255.)  Plaintiff has failed to meet his burden.

Accordingly, each of these motions is GRANTED as follows:

Plaintiff is ORDERED to provide further responses to both discovery requests, without objections, within the next 14-calendar days.

The Court GRANTS Defendant’s request for sanctions against Plaintiff in the amount of $1,185 for each motion (totaling $2,370) to be paid to Defendant’s counsel within the next 30-calendar days.

Finally, the Court reminds counsel for both parties that as officers of the court, they should treat one another with professional courtesy.  Counsel are required to affirm that they have read and reviewed the OCBA’s Civility Guidelines as available on the occourts.org website: https://www.occourts.org/directory/local-rules/2021/Civility_Guidelines.pdf"

Moving Party shall give notice.