Case Number: 19STCV00318 Hearing Date: November 15, 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 January 14, 2019, Plaintiff Dong Hahn (“Plaintiff”) filed a complaint against Defendants Jeff Chien, Jennifer Say, and Jeff Hsu alleging motor vehicle and general negligence for an automobile collision that occurred on February 20, 2017.

On October 9, 2019, Defendants Jennifer Say and Jeff Hsu filed motions to compel responses to Form Interrogatories, Special Interrogatories, and Request for Production of Documents (All Set One) pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure sections 2030.290, subdivision (b) and 2031.300, subdivision (b).

Trial is set for July 13, 2020.

PARTY’S REQUESTS

Defendants Jennifer Say and Jeff Hsu (“Moving Defendants”) request that the Court compel Plaintiff to provide verified responses without objections to Form Interrogatories, Special Interrogatories, and Request for Production (All Set One) within 10 days of the hearing on these motions due to Plaintiff’s failure to provide timely responses.

Moving Defendants also ask the Court to impose monetary sanctions of $1,329.45 against Plaintiff and his 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, subdivision (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.)

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 July 5, 2019, Moving Defendants served Form Interrogatories, Special Interrogatories, and Request for Production (All Set One) on Plaintiff by U.S. mail. (All Three Declarations of Jeremy Stevens (“Stevens Decl.”), ¶¶ 2, Exh. A.) Moving Defendants provided two extensions, providing an ultimate deadline for Plaintiff’s outstanding responses to be served on Moving Defendants by September 16, 2019. (Stevens Decl., ¶¶ 3-4, Exh. B-C.) Defendants had not received Plaintiff’s outstanding responses as of the time Jeremy Stevens signed his declarations on October 8, 2019. (Stevens Decl., ¶ 5.)

The discovery was properly served and Plaintiff failed to provide the requisite responses in a timely fashion. There are no facts showing Plaintiff acted with a substantial justification or that other circumstances exist that would make it unjust to impose sanctions.

Moving Defendants’ request of $1,329.45 in monetary sanctions consists of 3 hours in preparing the moving papers and 3 hours in appearing at the hearings at a rate of $143.75 an hour, plus three $61.65 filing fees and three $94 Court Call expenses. (Stevens Decl., ¶ 6) The Court finds this to be an unreasonable amount of sanctions because the hearings will take far less than 3 hours especially considering counsel plans on appearing through Court Call and only one Court Call fee is necessary. Rather, the Court finds $853.95 ($143.75/hr. x 4 hrs. plus three $61.65 filing fees plus one $94 Court Call expense) to be a reasonable amount of sanctions to be imposed against Plaintiff and his counsel of record for their abuse of the discovery process.

The motion is therefore GRANTED.

The Court orders Plaintiff to serve verified responses without objections to Moving Defendants’ Form Interrogatories, Special Interrogatories, and Request for Production (All Set One) within 20 days of this order.

The Court also orders Plaintiff and her counsel of record pay Moving Defendants $853.95, jointly and severally, within 30 days of this order.

Moving Defendants are ordered to give notice of this ruling.