Judge: Virginia Keeny, Case: 19VECV01047, Date: 2023-01-13 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 19VECV01047    Hearing Date: January 13, 2023    Dept: W

UNIVERSE, INC. v. J.S. CREATIONS, INC.

defendant’s MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO DEMAND FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS

Date of Hearing:        January 13, 2023                               Trial Date:       N/A

Department:              W                                                        Case No.:        19VECV01047

Moving Party:            Defendant J.S. Creations, Inc.

Responding Party:     Plaintiff Universe, Inc.

BACKGROUND

This action arises out of the alleged breach of contract and foreclosure of certain property located at 20330 Howard Court, Woodland Hills, CA 91364 (the “Property”). Plaintiff Universe, Inc. (“Plaintiff”) alleges on or about December 6, 2013, Plaintiff and Defendant J.S. Creations, Inc. (“Defendant”) entered into a purchase and sale transaction for the Property, for which Defendant provided financing. The financing was memorialized by a Note secured by a Deed of Trust. Plaintiff further alleges the parties agreed to extend the term of the Note by six months, which was followed by agreements for and successive extensions up to November 6, 2017. However, starting August 2017, Defendant has refused to accept payments and rejected payments that were tendered to it in the same form and manner as over the prior months and years. As a result, Plaintiff alleges, the Property was foreclosed upon and Peak Foreclosure Services, Inc. conducted a nonjudicial foreclosure sale on the property.

On January 16, 2018, Plaintiff filed a lawsuit (Los Angeles Superior Court, Case No. LC106713) (“prior action”) against Defendant alleging 1) Wrongful Foreclosure; 2) Breach of Contract; and 3) Injunctive Relief. On July 1, 2019, days before trial was set, Plaintiff filed a Request for Dismissal of the Complaint without Prejudice. Plaintiff filed the instant action on July 24, 2019 alleging 1) Wrongful Foreclosure and 2) Breach of Contract.

[Tentative] Ruling

Defendant’s Motion to Compel Responses to Demand for Production of Documents’ is GRANTED.

ANALYSIS

Defendant JS Creations moves the court for an order compelling responses to a post judgment demand for production of documents. Defendant also seeks sanctions against Plaintiff Universe, Inc. and its counsel Steven Stone jointly and severally in the amount of $1,786.65.

The provisions in California Code of Civil Procedure section 2030.010 et seq. relating to the enforcement of requests for production served in a civil action apply when a judgment creditor propounds requests for production on a judgment debtor seeking information to aid in the enforcement of the money judgment.  (See CCP § 708.030.) When a party to whom an inspection demand is directed fails to respond, under California Code of Civil Procedure section 2031.300, subdivision (b), a party making the demand may move for an order compelling a response to the inspection demand.  A party who fails to provide a timely response waives any objection, including one based on privilege or work product.  (CCP § 2031.300(a).) “’An inspection demand may provide the judgment creditor with documents disclosing the debtor's assets or earnings (e.g., tax returns, financial statements, payroll stubs, real property deeds, stock certificates, passbooks, deposit account statements, bonds, trust deeds, automobile ownership certificates (‘pink slips'), promissory notes, etc.)” (Lee v. Swansboro Country Property Owners Assn. (2007) 151 Cal.App.4th 575, 581.)

Defendant JS Creations served its post judgment demand for production of documents that would aid in the enforcement of the judgment on September 26, 2022. (Krishel Decl. ¶2.) When responses were not received, JS Creations’ counsel sent an email to Plaintiff’s counsel and requested responses to be served without objection. (Krishel Decl. ¶2.) As of the filing of this motion, no responses or documents have been received. (Krishel Decl. ¶3.)

Plaintiff does not dispute they have failed to respond to the outstanding post judgment demand for production. The opposition fails to offer any excuse or justification for Plaintiff’s refusal to respond to the document request. Plaintiff’s counsel’s only contention is that any sanctions against counsel is unwarranted.

The court grants Defendant JS Creations’ motion to compel discovery. The court also finds sanctions warranted against Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s counsel. Plaintiff’s counsel has not demonstrated sanctions against him would be unjust. Plaintiff’s counsel acknowledges receiving the discovery, but does not explain why no responses were not provided.

The court shall impose a monetary sanction against any party, person, or attorney who unsuccessfully makes or opposes a motion to compel a response to a demand for inspection, copying, testing, or sampling, 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. (CCP §2031.300(c).) Defendant seeks $1,786.65 in sanctions for 3.25 hours for preparing the motion and 2.5 hours reviewing any opposition and preparing a reply at counsel’s hourly rate of $300.00 as well as $61.65 filing fee.

The court grants Defendant’s request for sanctions.  Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s counsel are ordered, jointly and severally, to pay the sanction amount within 30 days.