Case Number: BC715022 Hearing Date: March 26, 2019 Dept: 5

Superior Court of California
County of Los Angeles
Department 5

VANESSA REnee valdez,

Plaintiff,

v.

maria del carmen carbajal,

Defendant.

Case No.: BC715022

Hearing Date: March 26, 2019

[TENTATIVE] order RE:

motions to compel discovery responses AND MOTION TO DEEM MATTERS ADMITTED

NOTICE

The Court will be dark for motions on March 26, 2019. However, the Court has reviewed and considered the pleadings and posts this tentative order. If no party requests a hearing (by alerting the Court’s clerk), the parties will waive their right to a hearing on this motion, and this order will issue. However, if at least one party requests a hearing, the Court will reschedule the hearing in this matter. The parties are ordered to notify the Clerk whether they are requesting a hearing.

TENTATIVE ORDER ON MOTION

Defendant Maria Del Carmen Carbajal (“Defendant”) moves to compel responses from Plaintiff Vanessa Renee Valdez (“Plaintiff”) to Special Interrogatories, set one (“SROG”), Form Interrogatories, set one (“FROG”), and Requests for Production of Documents, set one (“RPD”). Defendant also moves for an order deeming the matters specified in the Requests for Admissions to be admitted.

Defendant served the discovery requests on October 29, 2018. Then, On November 28, 2019, Plaintiff requested an extension to December 13, 2018, which was granted. Then, on December 14, 2018, Plaintiff requested an extension to December 28, 2018, which was granted. On January 16, 2019, Plaintiff’s counsel’s paralegal requested another extension, and Defendant’s counsel said that she would need to speak with Plaintiff’s counsel before granting a third extension. Plaintiff’s counsel did not contact Defendant’s counsel, following which Defendant’s counsel sent a meet-and-confer letter. Following a telephone conversation on February 5, 2019, Plaintiff agreed to provide discovery responses by February 19, 2019. No responses were provided as of the date the motions were filed. No oppositions were filed, and there is nothing in the record to suggest that Plaintiff has complied with the outstanding discovery requests.

Accordingly, Defendant’s motions to compel responses to the RPD, FROG, and SROG are GRANTED. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.290, 2031.300.) Plaintiff is ordered to serve verified responses to Defendant’s special interrogatories, form interrogatories, and requests for production of documents, without objections, within thirty (30) days of notice of this order. Defendant’s motion to deem the truth of the matters set forth in the RFA admitted is also GRANTED. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.280.)

Defendant requests sanctions against Plaintiff and/or Plaintiff’s counsel. The Court finds that Plaintiff’s failure to respond to outstanding discovery requests constitutes an abuse of the discovery process, warranting sanctions. The Court orders Plaintiff and/or Plaintiff’s counsel to pay $1,350, jointly and severally, based upon six hours of attorney time to prepare and file all of the motions at a rate of $185 per hour plus four filing fees of $60 each.

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

Defendant’s motions to compel responses to the RPD, FROG, and SROG are GRANTED. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.290, 2031.300.) Plaintiff is ordered to serve verified responses to Defendant’s special interrogatories, form interrogatories, and requests for production of documents, without objections, within thirty (30) days of notice of this order. Defendant’s motion to deem the truth of the matters set forth in the RFA admitted is also GRANTED. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.280.) Plaintiff and/or Plaintiff’s counsel shall pay sanctions in the amount of $1,350, jointly and severally, within thirty (30) days of notice of this order. Defendant shall give notice and file proof of such with the Court.

DATED: March 26, 2019 ___________________________

Stephen I. Goorvitch

Judge of the Superior Court