Case Number: BC644836 Hearing Date: April 18, 2018 Dept: 7

ORDER RE: PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO DISCOVERY AND REQUEST FOR MONETARY SANCTIONS; MOTION GRANTED

On December 22, 2016, Plaintiff Lauriza Tabita (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Defendants City of Los Angeles (“City”) and County of Los Angeles (“County”) for dangerous condition of public property.

On January 25, 2018, Plaintiff served Request for Production of Documents, Set Three and Special Interrogatories, Set Three on City. (Declaration of Kent Heeringa, ¶ 2.) City served no responses and Defendant’s counsel sent a meet and confer letter on March 7, 2018. (Heeringa Decl., ¶ 4.) City failed to respond and Plaintiff moves to compel responses and monetary sanctions.

Where a party fails to serve timely responses to discovery requests, the court may make an order compelling responses. (Code of 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 of Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.290, subd. (a), 2031.300, subd. (a).) Unlike a motion to compel further responses, a motion to compel responses is not subject to a 45-day time limit and the propounding party has no meet and confer obligations. (Sinaiko Healthcare Consulting, Inc., supra, 148 Cal.App.4th at p. 404.)

City filed no opposition to these Motions and it is undisputed that City failed to serve timely responses to Plaintiff’s third set of discovery requests. Accordingly, the Motions to compel City’s responses to discovery are GRANTED. City is ordered to serve verified responses, without objection, to Plaintiff’s Special Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents within twenty (20) days of the date of this Order.

Plaintiff seeks 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), 2031.300, subd. (c); Sinaiko Healthcare Consulting, Inc., supra, 148 Cal.App.4th at p. 404.)

The request for monetary sanctions is GRANTED. Monetary sanctions are imposed against City and its counsel of record, jointly and severally, in the sum of $660.00, for two hours preparing these unopposed Motions and attending the hearing, at Plaintiff’s counsel’s rate of $250.00 per hour, and $120.00 filing fees, to be paid within twenty (20) days of the date of this Order.

Moving party to give notice.