Case Number: 19STLC06167 Hearing Date: February 06, 2020 Dept: 25

MOTIONS TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO FORM INTERROGATORIES AND PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS AND REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS

(CCP §§ 2030.290, 2031.300)

TENTATIVE RULING:

Defendants Bong Kang and Pacific Paint and Construction, Inc.’s Motions to Compel Discovery are GRANTED. Verified responses without objections to the Form Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents separately propounded to Speros Maniates and Kathy Bukszar are to be served within 30 days of service of this order.

Defendants’ Request for Sanctions is also GRANTED in the reduced amount of $915.00 to be paid to Defendants within 30 days of service of this order.

I. Background

On July 1, 2019, Plaintiffs Speros Maniates (“Maniates”) and Kathy Bukszar (“Bukszar”) filed an action for negligence and negligent infliction of emotional distress against Defendants Bong Kang dba Pacific Painting Co., and Pacific Paint and Construction, Inc. (collectively, “Defendants”). On October 7, 2019, Defendants filed an Answer.

On January 2, 2020, Defendants filed the following four motions (1) Motion to Compel Plaintiff Speros Maniates’ Responses to Request for Production of Documents, Set One, and Request for Sanctions; (2) Motion to Compel Plaintiff Kathy Bukszar’s Responses to Request for Production of Documents, Set One, and Request for Sanctions; (3) Motion to Compel Plaintiff Speros Mainates’ Responses to Form Interrogatories, Set One, and Request for Sanctions; and (4) Motion to Compel Plaintiff Kathy Bukszar’s Responses to Form Interrogatories, Set One, and Request for Sanctions (collectively, the “Motions” or “Motions to Compel Discovery”).

To date, no opposition or reply briefs have been filed.

II. Legal Standard & Discussion

A party must respond to interrogatories and requests for production of documents within 30 days after service. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.260, subd. (a); Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.260, subd. (a).) If a party to whom interrogatories or requests for production of documents are directed does not provide timely responses, the requesting party may move for an order compelling responses to the discovery. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.290, subd. (b); Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.300, subd. (c).) The party also waives the right to make any objections, including one based on privilege or work-product protection. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.290, subd. (a); Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.300, subd. (a).) There is no time limit for a motion to compel responses to interrogatories or production of documents other than the cut-off on hearing discovery motions 15 days before trial. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2024.020, subd. (a), 2030.290; Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.300.) No meet and confer efforts are required before filing a motion to compel responses to the discovery. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.290; Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.300; Sinaiko Healthcare Consulting, Inc. v. Pacific Healthcare Consultants (2007) 148 Cal.App.4th 390, 411.)

Here, Defendants’ Motions are timely as they were filed before the December 13, 2020 cut-off for discovery motions. On October 4, 2019, Defendants served Form Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents separately on Maniates and Bukszar. (Motions., Vo. Decl., ¶ 2.) To date, Defendants have not received responses to any of the four discovery requests. (Id., ¶ 6.) Thus, Defendants are entitled to an order compelling Plaintiffs to serve responses without objections. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.290; Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.300.)

In addition, Code of Civil Procedure section 2023.030, subdivision (a) provides, in pertinent part, that the court may impose a monetary sanction on a party engaging in the misuse of the discovery process to pay the reasonable expenses, including attorney’s fees, incurred by anyone as a result of that conduct. A misuse of the discovery process includes failing to respond or to submit to an authorized method of discovery. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2023.010, subd. (d).)

The Court finds that Plaintiffs’ failure to respond to Defendants’ Form Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents a misuse of the discovery process.

Defendants’ counsel requests a total of $2,040.00 in sanctions, which includes 8 hours of attorney time billed at $225.00 per hour and four $60.00 filing fees. (Motions, Vo Decl., ¶ 7.) However, the amount sought is excessive given the simplicity of these nearly identical Motions and the lack of opposition and reply. Defendant’s Requests for Sanctions are GRANTED in the reduced amount of $915.00, which includes 3 hours of attorney time and 4 filing fees of $60.00.

III. Conclusion & Order

For the foregoing reasons, Defendants Bong Kang and Pacific Paint and Construction, Inc.’s Motions to Compel Discovery are GRANTED. Verified responses without objections to the Form Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents separately propounded to Speros Maniates and Kathy Bukszar are to be served within 30 days of service of this order.

Defendants’ Request for Sanctions is also GRANTED in the reduced amount of $915.00 to be paid to Defendants within 30 days of service of this order.

Moving party is ordered to give notice.