Judge: Virginia Keeny, Case: 21VECV00695, Date: 2022-08-24 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21VECV00695    Hearing Date: August 24, 2022    Dept: W

DEBORAH LYNN REECE v. RICHARD M. LESTER, et al.

MOTIONS TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO FORM INTERROGATORIES AND REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS; REQUESTS FOR MONETARY SANCTIONS

Date of Hearing:  August 24, 2022                       Trial Date: March 27, 2023

Department:  W                                                        Case No.: 21VECV00695

Moving Party: Plaintiff Deborah Lynn Reece

Responding Party:  None

BACKGROUND

This is a legal malpractice action.  Plaintiff Deborah Lynn Reece alleges she was injured in a motorbike/trike versus auto accident in Las Vegas, Nevada on May 30, 2013 and retained Defendant Richard M. Lester, A Law Corporation, (“Lester Law Corporation”) and Richard M. Lester (“Lester”) on or about October 31, 2013 to represent her.  Plaintiff alleges that the attorneys who worked on the case were Defendants Lester and Michael DeKruif (“DeKrui”).  Plaintiff alleges Defendants represented that the case was in the legal process of being resolved, but the litigation process was a long one and Plaintiff would eventually obtain recovery for her damages from the accident.  Plaintiff alleges that, after five years, she became suspicious and called DeKruif on May 28, 2020 who told her that Defendants had dropped the ball regarding the statute of limitations for her claim but were willing to compensate her for her injuries in the amount of $20,000.00 plus payment of her medical bills.  

On May 25, 2021, Plaintiff filed a complaint against Defendants Lester Law Corporation, Lester, and DeKruif, alleging:

1)    Legal Malpractice/General Negligence

2)    Breach of Contract

3)    Intentional Tort

Plaintiff now moves for court orders compelling Defendants Lester Law Corporation, Lester, and DeKruif to serve responses to Form Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents.  Plaintiff seeks monetary sanctions in the amount of $1,568.91 for each motion.

[Tentative] Ruling

1.    Plaintiff’s Motions to Compel Responses to Form Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents are GRANTED.

2.    Plaintiff’s Requests for Monetary Sanctions are GRANTED.

LEGAL STANDARD

Where a party fails to serve timely responses to discovery requests, the court may make an order compelling responses.  (CCP §§ 2030.290, 2031.300; Sinaiko 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 produce.  (CCP §§ 2030.290(a), 2031.300(a).)  Unlike a motion to compel further responses, a motion to compel responses is not subject to a 45-day time limit and the propounding party has no meet and confer obligations.  (Sinaiko Healthcare Consulting, Inc., supra, 148 Cal.App.4th at 404.)

DISCUSSION

Compel Responses

Plaintiff served Form Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents on Defendants Lester Law Corporation, Lester, and DeKruif on November 17, 2021.  (Motions, Assanti Decls., ¶ 3, Exs. A.)  Responses were due by December 22, 2021.  (Id., ¶ 4.)  On March 30, 2022, Plaintiff’s counsel reached out to Defendants regarding the status of the responses.  (Id., ¶ 5, Ex. B.)  Defendants’ counsel stated responses would be provided by April 8, 2022.  (Id.)  To date, Defendants have failed to serve responses.  (Id.)

As Plaintiff properly served the discovery requests on Defendants and Defendants have failed to serve responses, Plaintiff is entitled to court orders compelling Defendants to serve verified responses without objections to the subject discovery requests.

Accordingly, the motions to compel responses to Form Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents are granted.

Defendants Lester Law Corporation, Lester and DeKruif are ordered to separately serve verified responses without objections to Form Interrogatories, Set One and Request for Production of Documents, Set One within 20 days of notice of this order.

Sanctions

Plaintiff requests monetary sanctions in the amount of $1,568.91 for each motion.

As the motions are granted, Plaintiff’s requests for monetary sanctions are granted.  However, the Court finds the requested amounts are unreasonable.  The court finds each motion should have taken one hour to prepare, given the substantial overlap in issues and  law.  The Court thus awards sanctions in the amount of $443.91 (1 hour at $375/hour plus $61.65 in filing fees and $7.26 in e-filing fees) for each motion.

Accordingly, Lester Law Corporation and its counsel of record are ordered to pay total sanctions in the amount of $887.82, jointly and severally, within 30 days of notice of this order.

Defendant Lester and his counsel are ordered to pay total sanctions in the amount of $887.82, jointly and severally, within 30 days of notice of this order.

Defendant DeKruif and his counsel are ordered to pay total sanctions in the amount of $887.82, jointly and severally, within 30 days of notice of this order.