Judge: William A. Crowfoot, Case: BC721858, Date: 2022-10-17 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: BC721858    Hearing Date: October 17, 2022    Dept: 27

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

 

DIEGO GONZALEZ,

                   Plaintiff(s),

          vs.

 

RYAN MCCARTY, et al.,

 

                   Defendant(s).

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

      CASE NO.: BC721858

 

[TENTATIVE] ORDER RE: DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO COMPEL PLAINTIFF’S FURTHER RESPONSES; REQUEST FOR MONETARY SANCTIONS

 

Dept. 27

1:30 p.m.

October 17, 2022

 

PI Hub Courts will not hear a motion to compel further discovery responses to discovery until the parties have engaged in an Informal Discovery Conference (“IDC”).  The Courts may deny or continue the motion unless the parties have participated in an IDC before the scheduled hearing.  (See Seventh Amended Standing Order for Procedures in the Personal Injury Hub Courts (5/16/2022) (the “Order”).)

The Court’s file reflects that no IDC has taken place even though one was reserved on October 4, 2022.  

The parties are required to appear for an IDC to enable the Court to discuss with the parties their inability to resolve discovery disputes without Court intervention. The parties may or may not find this useful, but the Defendants here insufficiently consider the need the Court may have to attempt every effort to obtain resolution of discovery disputes without the need for an already overly burdened motions calendar to accommodate an otherwise resolvable dispute.

Moreover, the IDC provides the Court with an opportunity to weigh the good faith each party has brought to the attempt to resolve discovery disputes, which may later inform the Court's ruling on a request for sanctions. The Order clearly states “PI Hub Courts will not hear Motions to Compel Further Discovery Responses to discovery until the parties have engaged in an Informal Discovery Conference (IDC).” But, it also alerts parties that reserving or scheduling an IDC does not extend the time to file a Motion to Compel further, so the motions need to be timely filed, the IDC date reserved, and the motion hearing date reserved.

Lest there be any doubt as to the importance the Court gives to the IDC requirement, the Order states that “[a] party's failure to stipulate to extend the time to bring [a motion to compel further] so that an IDC may be held may subject the parties and/or counsel to the imposition of sanctions.”

Accordingly, Defendants’ motion to compel further discovery responses 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.