Case Number: BC707041 Hearing Date: December 28, 2018 Dept: 7

[TENTATIVE] ORDER RE: DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO COMPEL PLAINTIFFS’ RESPONSES TO DISCOVERY; GRANTED

On May 21, 2018, Plaintiff Petrona Sandoval (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Defendant Barbara Paige (“Defendant”) for motor vehicle negligence relating to a May 21, 2016 automobile accident. On June 28, 2018, Defendant served Form Interrogatories, Special Interrogatories, and Request for Production of Documents on Plaintiff. (Declaration of Peter K. Diamond, ¶ 2; Exh. A.) Plaintiff requested a three-week extension, but failed to respond by the extended deadline of August 23, 2018. (Diamond Decl., ¶ 3.) On August 31, 2018, defense counsel sent a letter requesting verified answers by September 7, 2018. (Diamond Decl., ¶ 4.) Plaintiff served unverified responses on September 17, 2018. (Diamond Decl., ¶ 5; Exh. C.) Defense counsel has called Plaintiff’s counsel’s office requesting verifications, but has not received any response. (Diamond Decl., ¶ 6.) To date, no verifications have been served. (Diamond Decl., ¶ 7.) Defendant moves to compel responses and monetary sanctions.

Where a party fails to serve timely responses to discovery requests, the court may make an order compelling responses. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.290, 2031.300; Sinaiko Healthcare Consulting, Inc. v. Pacific Healthcare Consultants (2007) 148 Cal.App.4th 390, 403.) A party failing to serve timely responses waives any objections, including based on privilege or the protection of attorney work product. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.290, subd. (a), 2031.300, subd. (a).) Unlike a motion to compel further responses, a motion to compel responses is not subject to a 45-day time limit and meet and confer obligations. (Sinaiko Healthcare Consulting, Inc., supra, 148 Cal.App.4th at p. 404.)

It is well-settled that “unsworn responses are tantamount to no responses at all.” (Appleton v. Superior Court (1888) 206 Cal.App.3d 632, 636; Zorro Inv. Co. v. Great Pacific Securities Corp. (1977) 69 Cal.App.3d 907, 914.)

Plaintiff served no opposition to these motions to compel and failed to serve timely verified responses to Defendant’s discovery requests. Accordingly, the motions to compel Plaintiff’s responses are GRANTED. Plaintiff is ordered to serve verified responses, without objection, to Defendant’s Form Interrogatories, Special Interrogatories, and Request for Production within twenty (20) days of the date of this Order.

Where the court grants a motion to compel responses, sanctions shall be imposed against the party who unsuccessfully makes or opposes a motion to compel, unless the party acted with substantial justification or the sanction would otherwise be unjust. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.290, subd. (c).) Defendant’s request for monetary sanctions is GRANTED and imposed against Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s counsel, jointly and severally, in the reduced amount of $611.25 for three hours at defense counsel’s hourly rate and $180.00 in filing fees, to be paid within twenty (20) days of the date of this Order.

Moving party to give notice.