Case Number: BC699040 Hearing Date: May 11, 2018 Dept: 34

SUBJECT: Motion to: (1) deem admitted plaintiff’s requests for admission; (2) compel responses to Form Interrogatories – Unlawful Detainer (Set 1); (3) compel responses to Form Interrogatories – General (Set 1); and (4) for sanctions

Moving Party: Plaintiff Jamison California Market Center, L.P.

Resp. Party: None

If defendant has not produced responses to the Requests for Admission by the time of the hearing, the Court will GRANT the motion. Plaintiff’s motions to compel responses to Form Interrogatories – General and Form Interrogatories – Unlawful Detainer are GRANTED. Defendant is sanctioned in the amount of $1,240.00

BACKGROUND:

Plaintiff commenced this unlawful detainer action on 03/21/18. Plaintiff alleges that defendant has not paid rent under the lease, that plaintiff has served defendant with a 3-day notice to pay rent or quit, and that defendant has failed to comply.

ANALYSIS:

Plaintiff moves the Court to deem the requests for admission admitted, to compel defendant’s responses to two separate sets of Form Interrogatories, and for sanctions in connection with each motion.

Relevant Law

“To give full effect to the summary nature of [Unlawful Detainer] . . . actions, special statutes shorten the normal discovery time-frames otherwise applicable in general civil actions.” (Friedman, et al., Cal. Prac. Guide: Landlord-Tenant (The Rutter Group 2017) ¶ 8:428.) With the exception of the shorter time-frames, discovery and discovery motions in Unlawful Detainer actions are subject to the same rules and restrictions as discovery in ordinary civil matters.

Requests for Admission

“The normal 10-day ‘hold’ on plaintiff’s request for admissions is shortened in UD actions to five days after service of summons on defendant (or defendant’s appearance, whichever first occurs). (Friedman, et al., supra, at ¶ 8:431; See Code Civ. Proc. § 2033.020, subd. (c).) “Parties served with a request for admission sin UD actions must be given at least five days after service of the requests to respond (rather than the normal 30 days) unless, on the requesting party’s motion, the court shortens the response time or, on the responding party’s motion, the court extends the response time.” (Friedman, et al., supra, at ¶ 8:431a; See Code Civ. Proc. § 2033.250, subd. (b).)

A motion to deem admitted requests for admissions lies based upon a showing of failure to respond timely. (Code Civ. Proc., §2033.280(b); Demyer v. Costa Mesa Mobile Home Estates (1995) 36 Cal.App.4th 393, 395 [disapproved on other grounds by Wilcox v. Birtwhistle (1999) 21 Cal.4th 973, 983]; Edmon & Karnow, Civ. Pro. Before Trial (The Rutter Group 2017) ¶ 8:1370.) Requests for admissions must be deemed admitted where no responses in substantial compliance were served before the hearing. (Code Civ. Proc., §2033.280(c); Edmon & Karnow, ¶ 8:1375.)

Interrogatories

“The normal 10-day ‘hold’ on plaintiff’s interrogatories is shortened in UD actions to five days after service of the summons and complaint (or defendant’s appearance, whichever first occurs).” (Id. at ¶ 8:429; See Code Civ. Proc. § 2030.020(c).) “Interrogatory responses in UD actions are due within five days after service of the interrogatories (rather than the normal 30 days) unless, on the propounding party’s motion, the court sets a shorter response time.” (Friedman, et al., supra, at ¶ 8:429; See Code Civ. Proc. § 260(b).) If a party fails to serve timely responses, “the party propounding the interrogatories may move for an order compelling response to the interrogatories.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.290(b).) By failing to respond, the offending party waives any objection to the demand. (Code Civ. Proc. § 2030.290(a).)

Time for filing discovery motions

“Discovery motions in unlawful detainers . . . may be made at ‘any time’ upon giving five days’ notice (rather than the 16 court days’ notice required in general civil litigation . . .). The deadline is extended where service is by mail, Express Mail, fax or other overnight delivery method.” (Friedman, et al., supra, at ¶ 8:431(f); See Code Civ. Proc. §§ 1013, 1170.8.)

Oppositions and replies to the motion may be made orally at the hearing or in writing. (See Cal. Rules of Court rule 3.1347, subd. (b).) “A responding party who seeks to have the opposition considered in advance of the hearing, must serve and file the written opposition on or before the court day before the hearing. Service must be by personal delivery, fax, Express Mail or other means . . . reasonably calculated to ensure delivery no later than the close of business the court day before the hearing. The court, in its discretion, may consider opposition filed later.” (Friedman, et al, supra, at ¶ 8:431(g); See Cal. Rules of Court rule 3.1347, subd. (c).)

Discussion

Motion to deem requests for admission admitted

Plaintiff moves for an order deeming each request for admission contained in Requests for Admission (Set One) admitted without objection. (See Notice of Motion, p. 2:5-7.) Plaintiff also seeks $1,120.00 in sanctions as compensation for the fees incurred in filing this motion. (See Id. at p. 2:15-17.)

Plaintiff commenced this action on 03/21/18 and served the Requests for Admission on defendant on 04/09/18 via overnight mail. (See Motion, p. 3:9-10; Law Decl., ¶ 7, Exh. A.) Under the special discovery rules for Unlawful Detainer actions, defendant’s responses were due on or before 04/17/18 but defendant did not respond or request any additional time to respond. (See Law Decl. ¶¶ 8, 9.) On 04/18/18, plaintiff’s counsel emailed defense counsel to inquire about defendant’s responses. (Id. at ¶ 10.) On 04/24/18, plaintiff’s counsel sent defense counsel a meet-and-confer letter inquiring about defendant’s responses. (Id. at ¶ 11; Exh. B.) As of 05/01/18, defendant had not provided any responses to the Requests for Admission. (Id. at ¶ 12.)

Plaintiff’s motion complies with the shortened time frame applicable to discovery motions in Unlawful Detainer actions. If defendant has not served code-compliant responses before the hearing, the Court will grant the motion.

Motions to compel responses to Form Interrogatories.

Plaintiff has filed two separate motions to compel defendant’s responses to Form Interrogatories. Plaintiff seeks to compel defendant’s responses to Form Interrogatories – General (Set One) and Form Interrogatories – Unlawful Detainer (Set One), which were served on 04/09/18. (See Notices of Motion, p. 2:5-8; Law Decls. ¶ 7.) Under the special discovery rules for Unlawful Detainer actions, defendant’s responses were due on or before 04/17/18 but defendant did not respond or request any additional time to respond. (See Law Decls. ¶¶ 8, 9.) On 04/18/18, plaintiff’s counsel emailed defense counsel to inquire about defendant’s responses. (Id. at ¶ 10.) On 04/24/18, plaintiff’s counsel sent defense counsel a meet-and-confer letter inquiring about defendant’s responses. (Id. at ¶ 11; Exh. B.) As of 05/01/18, defendant had not provided any responses to the Requests for Admission. (Id. at ¶ 12.)

Plaintiff’s motion complies with the shortened time frame applicable to discovery motions in Unlawful Detainer actions. Accordingly, the motions are GRANTED.

Sanctions

Plaintiff seeks sanctions in connection with each of the three discovery motions.

Plaintiff seeks $855.00 in sanctions in connection with each of the motions to compel responses to Form Interrogatories. (See Law Decls. ¶ 14.) This sum represents 1 hour to draft the motion, an anticipated 2 hours to draft a reply and attend the hearing, and a $60 filing fee. (Ibid.) Plaintiff’s counsel bills $265.00 per hour.)

Plaintiff also seeks $1,120 in sanctions in connection with the motion to deem admitted the Requests for Admission. (See Law Decl., ¶ 14.) This sum represents 1.5 hours to draft the motion, an anticipated 2.5 hours to draft a reply and attend the hearing, and a $60 filing fee. (Ibid.) Plaintiff’s counsel bills $265.00 per hour. (Ibid.)

While plaintiff is entitled to sanctions, the requested amount is excessive. The Court finds that one hour is a reasonable amount of time to spend drafting each of the motions. However, defendant has not yet filed an opposition, so plaintiff has not incurred any expenses to draft replies. Finally, as the motions will be heard simultaneously, plaintiff may recover for one hour of counsel’s time to attend the hearing. Plaintiff may also recover the $60 filing fee for each motion. In sum, plaintiff may recover for four hours of counsel’s time as well as $180 in filing fees.

Accordingly, the Court sanctions defendant in the amount of $1,240.00