Judge: William A. Crowfoot, Case: 20STCV16861, Date: 2022-09-28 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 20STCV16861    Hearing Date: September 28, 2022    Dept: 27

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

 

MARIO LICONA HERNANDEZ, et al.,

                   Plaintiff(s),

          vs.

 

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, et al.,

 

                   Defendant(s).

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

      CASE NO.: 20STCV16861

 

[TENTATIVE] ORDER RE: PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO STRIKE DEFENDANT’S ANSWER

 

Dept. 27

1:30 p.m.

September 28, 2022

 

On May 4, 2020, plaintiff Mario Licona Hernandez (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against The People of the State of California, acting by and through the Department of Transportation (“Defendant”) (erroneously sued as “California Department of Transportation”) and Daniel Parra (“Parra”).  Plaintiff alleges he was involved in a motor vehicle collision on August 9, 2019.  On September 1, 2022, Plaintiff filed this motion to strike Defendant’s answer and for terminating sanctions.  Plaintiff states that the motion is based on Defendant’s failure to provide meaningful answers to discovery requests. 

Plaintiff’s motion is based on a single case, Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance v. LCL (2008) 163 Cal.App.4th 1093 (“Liberty Mutual”).  In Liberty Mutual, the trial court had twice ordered the responding party to provide a supplemental response and imposed monetary sanctions.  The Court of Appeals cited to Code of Civil Procedure section 2030.290 which provides that “if a party then fails to obey an order compelling answers, the court may make those orders that are just, including the imposition of an issue sanction, an evidence sanction, or a terminating sanction.”  (Liberty Mutual, supra, 163 Cal.App.4th at p. 1102.) 

Here, no court order has been issued directing Defendant to provide supplemental responses.  In fact, no IDC has been scheduled and Plaintiff has not filed a motion for an order compelling Defendant’s further responses or compliance with document production.  Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion for terminating sanctions is DENIED.   

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.