Lawzilla Additional Information: Plaintiff is represented by attorney Michael Rix

Case Number: 18STCV07384 Hearing Date: September 09, 2019 Dept: 4A

Motion to Compel Responses to Form Interrogatories, Special Interrogatories, and Request for Production (All Set One)

Having considered the moving papers, the Court rules as follows. No opposing papers were filed.

BACKGROUND

On December 6, 2018, Plaintiff Dena Smith (“Plaintiff”) filed a complaint against Defendant Travis Perez (“Defendant”) alleging motor vehicle and general negligence for an automobile collision that occurred on December 16, 2016.

On August 7, 2019, Defendant filed motions to compel Plaintiff to provide verified responses without objections to Form Interrogatories, Special Interrogatories, and Request for Production (All Set One) pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure sections 2030.290, subdivision (b), and 2031.300, subdivision (b).

Trial is set for June 4, 2020.

PARTY’S REQUESTS

Defendant asks the Court to compel Plaintiff to provide verified responses without objections to Form Interrogatories, Special Interrogatories, and Request for Production (All Set One) within 15 days due to Plaintiff’s failure to provide timely responses.

Defendant also asks the Court to impose $2,280 in monetary sanctions against Plaintiff and her counsel of record for their abuse of the discovery process.

LEGAL STANDARD

If a party to whom interrogatories are directed fails to serve a timely response, the propounding party may move for an order compelling responses and for a monetary sanction. (Code Civ. Proc. § 2030.290, subd. (b).) The statute contains no time limit for a motion to compel where no responses have been served. All that need be shown in the moving papers is that a set of interrogatories was properly served on the opposing party, that the time to respond has expired, and that no response of any kind has been served. (Leach v. Superior Court (1980) 111 Cal.App.3d 902, 905-906.)

Where there has been no timely response to a demand for the production of documents, the demanding party may seek an order compelling a response. (Code Civ. Proc. § 2031.300, subd. (b).) Failure to timely respond waives all objections, including privilege and work product. (Code Civ. Proc. § 2031.300, subd. (a).) Thus, unless the party to whom the demand was directed obtains relief from waiver, he or she cannot raise objections to the documents demanded. There is no deadline for a motion to compel responses. Likewise, for failure to respond, the moving party need not attempt to resolve the matter outside court before filing the motion.

Under California Code of Civil Procedure section 2023.030, subd. (a), “[t]he court may impose a monetary sanction ordering that one engaging in the misuse of the discovery process, or any attorney advising that conduct, or both pay the reasonable expenses, including attorney’s fees, incurred by anyone as a result of that conduct. . . . If a monetary sanction is authorized by any provision of this title, the court shall impose that sanction unless it finds that the one subject to the sanction acted with substantial justification or that other circumstances make the imposition of the sanction unjust.” Failing to respond or to submit to an authorized method of discovery is a misuse of the discovery process. (Code of Civ. Proc. § 2023.010, subd. (d).)

Sanctions are mandatory in connection with motions to compel responses to interrogatories and requests for production of documents against any party, person, or attorney who unsuccessfully makes or opposes a motion to compel 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, subd. (c), 2031.300, subd. (c).)

California Rules of Court, rule 3.1348, subdivision (a) states: “The court may award sanctions under the Discovery Act in favor of a party who files a motion to compel discovery, even though no opposition to the motion was filed, or opposition to the motion was withdrawn, or the requested discovery was provided to the moving party after the motion was filed.”

DISCUSSION

On March 29, 2019, Defendant served Form Interrogatories, Special Interrogatories, and Request for Production (All Set One) on Plaintiff by U.S. Mail. (All Three Declarations of Craig W. Mackie, Esq. (“Mackie Decl.”), ¶ 2, Exh. A.) Defendant granted six extensions for Plaintiff to serve the outstanding responses, providing an ultimate deadline of July 15, 2019. (Mackie Decl., ¶¶ 4-10, Exh. B-F.) Defendant had not received responses as of the date these motions to compel were prepared. (Mackie Decl., ¶¶ 12.)

The Court finds the motion must be granted due to Plaintiff’s failure to provide timely responses to Defendant’s written discovery. Plaintiff has not opposed this motion. There is no evidence that Plaintiff acted with substantial justification or that there are circumstances that would make the imposition of sanctions unjust.

Defendant’s request for $2,280 in monetary sanctions consists of 6 hours in preparing the motions and 6 hours in traveling to and appearing at the hearings at a rate of $175 an hour, plus three $60 filing fees. (Mackie Decl., ¶ 13.) The Court finds this amount to be unreasonable because the three motions are nearly duplicative and the three hearings are set to be heard on the same date, in the same courthouse, in the same department, concurrently. Rather, the Court finds $1,055 ($175/hr. x 5 hrs. plus three $60 filing fees) to be a reasonable amount of sanctions to be imposed against Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s counsel of record, jointly and severally, for their abuse of the discovery process.

Therefore, the motions are GRANTED.

Plaintiff is ordered to serve verified responses without objections to Defendant’s Form Interrogatories, Special Interrogatories, and Request for Production (All Set One) within 30 days of this order.

Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s counsel of record are ordered to pay Defendant $1,055, jointly and severally, within 30 days of the hearing on this motion.

Defendant is ordered to give notice of this ruling.