Case Number: BC708324 Hearing Date: February 14, 2020 Dept: 28

Motion to Compel Responses to Request for Production (Set One)

Having considered the moving, opposing, and reply papers, the Court rules as follows.

BACKGROUND

On May 31, 2018, Plaintiff Chong Lin Liu (“Liu”) filed a complaint against Defendants Cameron Anthony Lamar Boyd and Tosha Jeanine Boyd (“Defendants”). The complaint alleges motor vehicle negligence for an incident that occurred on November 7, 2017.

On December 26, 2019, Defendants filed a motion to compel Plaintiff to provide verified responses without objections to Request for Production (Set One) pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 2031.300.

Trial is set for May 28, 2020.

PARTIES’ REQUESTS

Defendants ask the Court to compel Plaintiff to serve verified responses without objections to Request for Production of Documents (Set One) due to Plaintiff’s failure to serve sufficient responses.

Defendant also asks the Court to impose $1,355 in monetary sanctions against Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s counsel for their abuse of the discovery process.

LEGAL STANDARD

“Parties must participate in an [Informal Discovery Conference] before a Motion to Compel Further Responses to Discovery will be heard unless the moving party submits evidence, by way of declaration, that the opposing party as failed or refused to participate in an [Informal Discovery Conference.] (LA Superior Court Standing Order; April 16, 2018, ¶ 5 (emphasis in original).) A motion to compel further is the appropriate motion when the responding party provides a response to the propounded discovery. (See Deyo v. Kilbourne (1978) 84 Cal.App.3d 771, 788.)

DISCUSSION

On October 22, 2018, Defendants served Request for Production (Set One) on Plaintiff by U.S. mail. (Colmey Decl., ¶ 2, Exh. A.) On February 14, 2019, Plaintiff served verified responses to Defendants’ Request for Production (Set One) by U.S. mail. (Colmey Decl., ¶ 3, Exh. B.) On September 27, 2019, Defendants served Supplemental Request for Production of Documents on Plaintiff by U.S. mail. (Colmey Decl., ¶ 5, Exh. C.) On December 5, 2019, Plaintiff served a response to Defendants’ Supplemental Request for Production of Documents on Defendants by U.S. mail. (Colmey Decl., ¶ 8, Exh. E.)

The Court finds Defendants have filed the wrong motion. A motion to compel documents is proper when a party is requested to serve responses and fails to do so. Here, Plaintiff served responses to Defendants’ requests for production. Defendants contend Plaintiff’s responses are deficient. As such, Defendants must file a motion to compel further pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 2031.310 and participate in an Informal Discovery Conference before the hearing on the motion.

CONCLUSION

The motion is DENIED.

Defendants are ordered to give notice of this ruling.