Judge: William A. Crowfoot, Case: 19GDCV00131, Date: 2023-03-24 Tentative Ruling


Case Number: 19GDCV00131    Hearing Date: March 24, 2023    Dept: 3

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - NORTHEAST DISTRICT

 

BIOLIFE CORPORATION,

                   Plaintiff(s),

          vs.

 

YING SHAM,

                   Defendant(s).

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

      CASE NO.: 19GDCV00131

 

[TENTATIVE] ORDER RE: YING SHAM’S MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES FROM WELLS BROTHERS, INC. TO REQUEST FOR IDENTIFICATION AND PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS; REQUEST FOR MONETARY SANCTIONS

 

Dept. 3

8:30 a.m.

March 24, 2023

 

 

On January 29, 2019, Biolife Corporation (“Biolife”) filed this action against defendant Ying Sham (“Sham”).  Sham, who was Biolife’s manager, allegedly took Biolife’s inventory and sold it online at lower prices. 

On March 14, 2019, Sham filed a cross-complaint against Biolife, Hai Feng Piao aka James Piao (“Piao”), and Wells Brothers, Inc. (“Wells Brothers”) claiming various violation of labor and employment laws.  

On December 29, 2022, Sham served Requests for Identification and Production of Documents (Set One) on Wells Brothers.  Sham requested Wells Brothers’ tax records and profit loss statements to determine the validity of its purported damages even though Wells Brothers is not asserting any claims against Sham for damages.  Sham now moves for an order compelling Wells Brothers to serve responses without objections and produce documents. 

In opposition, Wells Brothers argues that it was not required to serve responses because the discovery was untimely.  At the time the discovery requests were served, the discovery cut-off date was January 15, 2023, whereas responses would not be due until January 30, 2023.  (CCP § 2024.020, subd. (a) [“[A]ny party shall be entitled as a matter of right to complete discovery proceedings on or before the 30th day, . . . before the date initially set for the trial of the action.”])  Discovery is considered completed on the day a response is due.  (CCP § 2024.010.)  Therefore, Wells Brothers correctly asserts that it had no obligation to respond to these untimely requests even if the parties later stipulated on January 11, 2023 to continue the trial date and all discovery and motion cutoff deadlines. 

In light of the foregoing, the motion to compel is DENIED. 

 

Moving party to give notice.

 

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at ALHDEPT27@lacourt.org indicating intention to submit on the tentative as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org.  Please be advised that if you submit on the tentative and elect not to appear at the hearing, the opposing party may nevertheless appear at the hearing and argue the matter.  Unless you receive a submission from all other parties in the matter, you should assume that others might appear at the hearing to argue.  If the Court does not receive emails from the parties indicating submission on this tentative ruling and there are no appearances at the hearing, the Court may, at its discretion, adopt the tentative as the final order or place the motion off calendar.

 

Dated this 24th day of March 2023

 

 

 

 

William A. Crowfoot

Judge of the Superior Court