Case Number: BC692061 Hearing Date: February 06, 2019 Dept: 5

Superior Court of California
County of Los Angeles
Department 5

victor craig,

Plaintiff,

v.

Good news transportation, llc, et al.

Defendants.

Case No.: BC692061

Hearing Date: February 6, 2019

[TENTATIVE] order RE:

motions to compel further responses to interrogatories

Victor Craig (“Plaintiff”) was injured in a motor vehicle accident with John Thomas McClune (“McClune”), an employee of Good News Transportation, LLC (collectively, “Defendants”). Now, Defendants object to certain form and special interrogatories, leading to these motions to compel. Plaintiffs filed two motions to compel, one for each of the form and special interrogatories, and Defendants have not opposed the motions. The Court grants the motions to compel. McClune admitted in his responses to the form interrogatories that he takes a series of medication, including oxycodone, within a 24-hour period before the accident. That alone constitutes good cause for Plaintiff to gather information concerning McClune’s medical history and healthcare providers. Also, Defendants have provided unsatisfactory answers to basic questions about the accident. For example, when asked in Special Interrogatory #62 for details about the accident, Defendants simply state: “Respondent sustained injuries in this incident that currently affect his recollection of the ACCIDENT. Discovery and investigation are continuing.” That response is not satisfactory, because it does not make clear whether McClune remembers some of the details or none of the details. Therefore, the Court grants Plaintiffs’ motions to compel further responses to the form and supplemental interrogatories with the exception of the response to Form Interrogatory #16.1, which is sufficient because discovery is still ongoing.

Plaintiff has noticed a request for sanctions against Defendants and their counsel of record for $5,800 for each of the two motions to compel. The Court finds that Defendants have abused the discovery process warranting sanctions. However, the amounts requested by Plaintiff are excessive. The Court orders sanctions in the amount of $1,000, based on five hours at a reasonable billing rate of $200 per hour, plus two filing fees of $60 each.

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

Plaintiff’s motions to compel further responses to the form and special interrogatories are granted per Code of Civil Procedure sections 2030.290 and 2031.300. Plaintiff is ordered to serve verified responses, without objections, within thirty (30) days of notice of this order.

Defendants and their counsel of record are ordered to pay monetary sanctions in the amount of $1,060 to Plaintiffs, by and through counsel, within thirty (30) days of notice of this order. Defendants and their counsel of record are jointly and severally liable for this amount.

Plaintiff shall provide notice and file proof of such with the Court.

DATED: February 6, 2019 ___________________________

Stephen I. Goorvitch

Judge of the Superior Court