Case Number: BC673547 Hearing Date: March 19, 2018 Dept: 97

Superior Court of California
County of Los Angeles
Department 97

Petros Karapogkosian,

Plaintiff,

v.

Jeffrey Aniciete, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No.: BC673547

Hearing Date: March 19, 2018

[TENTATIVE] order RE:

Plaintiff’S motions to compel discovery responses from Defendant

Plaintiff’S motion to deem requests for admissions admitted

This case arises out of a motor vehicle collision on September 9, 2016. Plaintiff Petros Karapogkosian (“Plaintiff”) has filed three motions to compel responses from Defendant Jeffrey Aniciete (“Defendant”) for: (1) Request for Production of Documents (“RPD”), set one; (2) Form Interrogatories (“FROG”), set one; and (3) Special Interrogatories (“SROG”), set one. In addition, Plaintiff has filed a fourth motion to deem admitted the truth of the matters specified in the Request for Admissions (“RFA”), set one. Plaintiff also requests sanctions for Defendant’s failure to respond.

On December 7, 2017, Plaintiff served the discovery requests on Defendant. Defendant’s responses were due on or before January 11, 2018. Plaintiff granted an extension for Defendant to serve the responses on or before January 25, 2018. On January 25, 2018, Defendant served on Plaintiff unverified responses to each of the discovery requests. As of the filing of these motions on February 13, 2018, Plaintiff had not received verified responses from Defendant.

Defendant opposes all four motions and requests sanctions against Plaintiff for filing the motions. Defendant asserts that these motions are improper because Defendant served responses on January 25, 2018. However, the responses served on January 25, 2018 were unverified. The Court notes that “[u]nsworn responses are tantamount to no responses at all.” (Appleton v. Superior Court (1988) 206 Cal.App.3d 632, 636.) Therefore, the responses were not properly served until the verifications were provided to Plaintiff, which occurred on February 16, 2018 — after the filing of the instant motions.

Defendant argues that Plaintiff’s motions are procedurally defective because there was no meet and confer, nor was there an Informal Discovery Conference (“IDC”). Both of these arguments are without merit. A motion to compel further requires that the parties meet and confer under Section 2030.300. However, there is no such requirement for a simple motion to compel, which are the motions at issue in this case. Further, this Court’s Seventh General Order requires that parties participate in an IDC only for a motion to compel further. There is no such requirement for a motion to compel. Therefore, Defendant’s arguments on procedural grounds fail.

In any event, Defendant has served verified responses to Plaintiff’s SROG, FROG and RPD prior to the commencement of the hearing on these motions. Therefore, Plaintiff’s motions to compel responses are deemed moot.

Defendant also served verified responses to Plaintiff’s RFA before the commencement of the hearing on the motion to deem admitted, and thus the Court denies Plaintiff’s motion to deem the requests admitted. (CCP § 2033.280, subd. (c).)

Plaintiff requests sanctions for Defendant’s failure to timely respond. Plaintiff has sufficiently noticed sanctions against both Defendant and defense counsel, Sophia Kuo Tiong. The Court grants sanctions for two hours to prepare the four motions and appear at the hearing, at $350.00 per hour, plus four $60 filing fees, for a total of $940.00. Defendant Jeffrey Anciete and his counsel of record, Sophia Kuo Tiong, are ordered to pay monetary sanctions in the amount of $940.00 to Plaintiff, by and through counsel, within thirty (30) days of notice of this order.

Defendant also requests sanctions, but the Court finds that there is no basis to support sanctions against Plaintiff based on the motions which are the subject of this order.

Conclusion and Order

Plaintiff’s motions to compel verified responses to Plaintiff’s form interrogatories, special interrogatories and request for production of documents are deemed moot. Plaintiff’s motion to deem RFA admitted is denied.

Defendant’s request for sanctions is denied. Plaintiff’s request for sanctions is granted. Defendant Jeffrey Anciete and his counsel of record, Sophia Kuo Tiong, are ordered to pay monetary sanctions in the amount of $940.00 to Plaintiff, by and through counsel, within thirty (30) days of notice of this order.

Plaintiff is ordered to provide notice of this order.

DATED: March 19, 2018 ___________________________

Elaine Lu

Judge of the Superior Court