Case Number: BC593607 Hearing Date: January 07, 2019 Dept: 5

Superior Court of California
County of Los Angeles
Department 5

eduardo meza,

Plaintiff,

v.

martin davalos, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No.: BC593607

Hearing Date: January 7, 2019

[TENTATIVE] order RE:

Plaintiff’S motions to compel discovery responses

Plaintiff Eduardo Meza (“Plaintiff”) filed three motions to compel responses from Defendant Maria Davalos (“Defendant”) to: (1) Request for Production of Documents (“RPD”), set one; (2) Form Interrogatories (“FROG”), set one; and (3) Special Interrogatories (“SROG”), set one. Plaintiff also filed a motion to deem admitted the matters specified in Requests for Admissions (“RFA”), set one.

Plaintiff served the discovery requests on Defendant by mail on October January 12, 2018. Defendant’s discovery responses were due on February 16, 2018. As of the date Plaintiff filed these motions, Plaintiff has not received any response from Defendant. Defendant has not filed any opposition to Plaintiff’s motions.

Based upon the foregoing, the Court grants Plaintiff’s motions to compel responses to the RPD, FROG, and SROG per Code of Civil Procedure sections 2030.290 and 2031.300. Defendant is ordered to serve verified responses, without objections, to Plaintiff’s RPD, FROG, and SROG within thirty (30) days of notice of this order.

Plaintiff also moves under Code of Civil Procedure section 2033.280 to deem the matters specified in the RFA admitted. Where a party fails to timely respond to requests for admissions, the propounding 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 of Civ. Proc., § 2033.280, subd. (b).) The party who failed to respond waives any objections to the demand, unless the court grants that party relief from the waiver on a noticed motion. (Code of Civ. Proc., § 2033.280, subds. (a)(1)-(2).) The Court “shall” grant a motion to deem admitted requests for admissions, “unless it finds that the party to whom the requests for admission have been directed has served, before the hearing on the motion, a proposed response to the requests for admission that is in substantial compliance with Section 2033.220.” (Code of Civ. Proc., § 2033.280, subd. (c).)

Defendant has not filed any opposition to Plaintiff’s motion to deem the RFA admitted. Nor has Defendant otherwise demonstrated that Defendant has served, before the hearing on the motion, a proposed response to the RFA. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s unopposed motion for an order deeming the RFA admitted is granted per Code of Civil Procedure section 2033.280. Defendant is deemed to have admitted the truth of all matters specified in the RFA as of this date.

Plaintiff requests sanctions against Defendant. The Court finds Defendant’s failure to respond a misuse of the discovery process. Plaintiff gave Defendant and Defendant’s counsel of record, Manuel Duran, adequate notice of his request for sanctions. The Court grants sanctions against Defendant and defense counsel (jointly and severally) for ten hours to prepare the four motions and appear at the hearing on the motions at $250 per hour, plus four filing fees of $60, for a total of $2,740.

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

Plaintiff’s motion to compel responses to the RPD, FROG, and SROG are granted per Code of Civil Procedure, sections 2030.290 and 2031.300. Defendant is ordered to serve verified responses to Plaintiff’s RPD, FROG, and SROG, without objections, within thirty (30) days of notice of this order.

Plaintiff’s motion to deem the matters specified in the RFA is granted. Defendant is deemed to have admitted the truth of all matters specified in the RFA as of this date.

Defendant and defense counsel Manuel Duran, jointly and severally, are ordered to pay monetary sanctions in the amount of $2,740 to Plaintiff, by and through counsel, within thirty (30) days of notice of this order.

Plaintiff is ordered to provide notice of this order and file proof of service of such.

DATED: January 7, 2019 ___________________________

Stephen I. Goorvitch

Judge of the Superior Court