Case Number: 19STCV10464 Hearing Date: November 26, 2019 Dept: 61

Defendants and Cross-Complainants Jose Garcia, Fernando Covarrubias, and Oliver Arellano’s Motions to Compel Responses to Form and Special Interrogatories and Requests for Production to Plaintiffs and Cross-Defendants Dawn Downs and Jeff T. Grange are GRANTED. The court awards sanctions against Plaintiffs and their counsel in the amount of $3,825.

MOTION TO COMPEL

A propounding party may demand a responding party to produce documents that are in their possession, custody or control. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.010.) A party may likewise conduct discovery by propounding interrogatories to another party to be answered under oath. (Code Civ. Proc. § 2030.010, subd. (a).) The responding party must respond to the production demand either by complying, by representing that the party lacks the ability to comply, or by objecting to the demand. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.210.) The responding party must respond to the interrogatories by answering or objecting. (Code Civ. Proc. § 2030.210, subd. (a).) If the responding party fails to serve timely responses, the propounding party may move for an order compelling responses to the production demand and interrogatories. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.290, 2031.300.)

A party who fails to serve a timely response to interrogatories or a demand for inspection waives any objection to the demand. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.290, 2031.300.)

Likewise, “[a]ny party may obtain discovery . . . by a written request that any other party to the action admit the genuineness of specified documents, or the truth of specified matters of fact, opinion relating to fact, or application of law to fact. A request for admission may relate to a matter that is in controversy between the parties.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.010.) If a party fails to serve a timely response to requests for admissions, “[t]he requesting party may move for an order that the genuineness of any documents and the truth of any matters specified in the requests be deemed admitted, as well as for a monetary sanction” (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.280 subd. (b).)

A party who fails to timely respond to requests for admission waives all objections to the requests. (Code Civ. Proc. § 2033.280, subd. (a).)

Defendants argue that Form and Special Interrogatories and Requests for Production were served on August 28, 2019, with responses due on October 2, 2019, but that no responses have been received. (Shaneyfelt Decl. ¶¶ 5–7.)

If objection-free responses are not served by the hearing on these motions, the motions shall be GRANTED.

SANCTIONS

The prevailing party on a motion to compel is generally entitled to monetary sanctions, unless the court “finds that the one subject to the sanction acted with substantial justification or that other circumstances make the imposition of the sanction unjust.” (Code Civ. Proc. §§ 2030.290, 2031.300.) Sanctions are also mandatory against a party whose failure to serve responses to requests for admission makes the motion necessary. (Code Civ. Proc. § 2033.280, subd. (c).)

Defendants ask for $2,125.00 in sanctions, representing five hours of work at $425 per hour, in connection with each motion, for a total sought award of $6,375.00. (Shaneyfelt Decl. ¶¶ 7–9.) This includes two hours preparing a reply to an opposition which was never filed, leading to a total maximum sanctions award of $3,825.00.

The court awards sanctions against Plaintiffs and their counsel in the amount of $3,825.

Defendants to provide notice.