Judge: William A. Crowfoot, Case: 21STCV27489, Date: 2022-09-14 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV27489    Hearing Date: September 14, 2022    Dept: 27

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

On July 27, 2021, plaintiff Lauray Hilton (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against defendants Hugo Diaz (“Defendant”) and Lyft, Inc. arising from an automobile accident that occurred on October 7, 2019.  On August 30, 2021, Plaintiff served Requests for Production of Documents (Set One) and Requests for Admission (Set One) on Defendant, not defense counsel, by mail.  On October 21, 2021, the clerk entered default against Defendant at Plaintiff’s request.  On May 11, 2022, the Court signed an order setting aside the default.

On June 7, 2022, Plaintiff’s counsel sent to defense counsel a letter via mail and email which requested Defendant’s discovery responses by July 7, 2022.  The letter attached courtesy copies of the discovery requests.  Another letter was sent to defense counsel via mail and email on August 2, 2022. 

          Compel Responses

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).) 

Defendant did not oppose this motion and it is undisputed that Defendant did not serve verified responses to Plaintiff’s discovery requests.  Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion to compel is GRANTED. Defendant is ordered to serve verified responses, without objections, to Plaintiff’s Request for Production of Documents (Set One) within 20 days of the date of this Order.

Deem Admitted

Where a party fails to timely respond to a request for admission, the propounding party may move for an order that the genuineness of any documents and the truth of any matters specified in the requests be deemed admitted.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.280, subd. (b).)  The court shall grant a motion to deem admitted requests for admissions, “unless it finds that the party to whom the requests for admission have been directed has served, before the hearing on the motion, a proposed response to the requests for admission that is in substantial compliance with Section 2033.220.”  (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.280, subd. (c).)

Defendant did not oppose this motion and it is undisputed that no responses to Plaintiff’s Requests for Admission (Set One) were served before the hearing on this motion.  Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion to deem admitted is GRANTED.

Monetary Sanctions

Where the court grants a motion to compel responses, sanctions shall be imposed 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 of Civ. Proc., § 2030.290, subd. (c).)  Where a party fails to provide a timely response to requests for admission, “[i]t is mandatory that the court impose a monetary sanction under Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 2023.010) on the party or attorney, or both, whose failure to serve a timely response to requests for admission necessitated this motion.”  (Code of Civ. Proc., § 2033.280, subd. (c).)

Plaintiff’s request for sanctions is GRANTED and imposed against Defendant and counsel, jointly and severally, in the reduced amount of $620, consisting of 2 hours at Plaintiff’s counsel’s hourly rate of $250 and filing fees of $120. 

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.