Case Number: BC670211 Hearing Date: April 25, 2018 Dept: 7

ORDER RE: DEFENDANT’S MOTIONS TO COMPEL PLAINTIFF’S RESPONSES TO DISCOVERY AND MONETARY SANCTIONS; MOTIONS GRANTED

On September 5, 2017, Plaintiff Zion Saulter (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Defendant Rowland Unified School District (“Defendant”) for premises liability relating to an injury sustained on a playground on Defendant’s property.

On November 16, 2017, Defendant served Request for Production of Documents, Form Interrogatories, and Special Interrogatories on Plaintiff. (Declaration of Jennifer Hu, ¶ 3.) On December 14, 2017 and again on December 28, 2017, Defendant granted one week extensions on responses. (Hu Decl., ¶ 4.) Defendant granted an additional extension on January 5, 2018, and then Plaintiff’s counsel was relieved as counsel on February 22, 2018. (Hu Decl., ¶¶ 6, 7.)

Defendant then sent courtesy copies of all outstanding discovery to Plaintiff and gave Plaintiff until March 22, 2018 to provide verified responses, without objection. (Hu Decl., ¶ 8.) To date, Plaintiff has not served responses or contacted defendant’s counsel. (Hu Decl., ¶ 9.) Defendant moves to compel Plaintiff’s responses and impose 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.)

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

Defendant 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 Plaintiff in the sum of $675.00, for two hours preparing these unopposed Motions and one hour attending the hearing, at counsel’s rate of $185.00 per hour, and $120.00 filing fees. Plaintiff is ordered to pay this monetary sanction within twenty (20) days of the date of this Order.

Moving party to give notice.