Judge: William A. Crowfoot, Case: 20STCV04515, Date: 2022-10-26 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 20STCV04515    Hearing Date: October 26, 2022    Dept: 27

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL
DISTRICT

On February 4, 2020, plaintiff Rita
Marie Letizia Schneider (“Ms. Schneider”), individually and as the
successor-in-interest and personal representative of the estate of Lawrence
William Schneider filed this action against defendants Jaguar Land Rover North
America, LLC (“Defendant”) and Galpin Jaguar Lincoln-Mercury, Inc. (“Galpin”).  On December 10, 2020, Ms. Schneider filed a
First Amended Complaint (“FAC”), which added Decedent’s son, Chase Schneider
(“Chase”), as an individual plaintiff and as Decedent’s successor-in-interest.

On March 24, 2022, Defendant served
Chase with Form Interrogatories (Set One), Special Interrogatories (Set One)
and Request for Production of Documents (Set One).  Despite attempts to meet and confer, no
responses were served. 

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).) 

Chase did not oppose these motions and
it is undisputed responses were not served. 
Defendant’s motions are GRANTED and Chase is ordered to serve verified
responses without objections to Defendant’s Form Interrogatories (Set One),
Special Interrogatories (Set One) and Request for Production of Documents (Set
One) within 20 days of the date of this Order.  

The Code of Civil Procedure provides
that the court shall impose a monetary sanction against the party who
unsuccessfully makes or opposes a motion to compel, unless the party acted with
substantial justification or the sanction would otherwise be unjust.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.290, subd. (c),
2031.300, subd. (c).)  Defendant’s
request for sanctions is GRANTED and imposed against Chase in the reduced
amount of $1,035 for 3 hours at defense counsel’s hourly rate of $285.00 and $180.00
in filing fees, to be paid within 20 days of the date of this Order.

Although Galpin’s motion for terminating
sanctions against Chase was granted on August 3, 2022, the Court cannot grant
Defendant’s request for terminating sanctions because there is no evidence that
Chase has disobeyed any discovery orders issued by the Court with respect to
discovery propounded by Defendant.  (See
Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.300, subd. (c) [“If a party then fails to obey the
order compelling a response, the court may make those orders that are just,
including the imposition of . . . a terminating sanction….”]) 

Moving party to give notice.

Parties who intend to submit on this
tentative must send an email to the Court at SSCDEPT27@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.