ALEJANDRO FUENTES-AGUILAR VS MIRAGE AUTO SALES & LEASING, INC

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: 18STLC00326    Hearing Date: February 27, 2020    Dept: 26

Fuentes-Aguilar v. Mirage Auto Sales & Leasing, Inc., et al.

MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION

AND REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS

(CCP § 2031.300)

TENTATIVE RULING:

Plaintiff Alejandro Fuentes-Aguilar’s Motion to Compel Responses to Requests for Production and Request for Sanctions IS GRANTED. DEFENDANT MIRAGE AUTO SALES & LEASING, INC. IS TO SERVE VERIFIED RESPONSES TO THE REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS WITHOUT OBJECTION WITHIN 20 DAYS’ NOTICE OF THIS ORDER. DEFENDANT MIRAGE AUTO SALES & LEASING, INC. AND ITS COUNSEL OF RECORD ARE JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY TO PAY SANCTIONS OF $375.00 TO PLAINTIFF’S COUNSEL WITHIN 30 DAYS’ NOTICE OF THIS ORDER.

ANALYSIS:

Plaintiff Alejandro Fuentes-Aguilar (“Plaintiff”) propounded Requests for Production, Set One on Defendant Mirage Auto Sales & Leasing, Inc. (“Defendant”) on November 7, 2019. (Motion, Johnson Decl., ¶4 and Exh. 1.) Despite numerous extensions of the time to respond, Defendant has not served responses to date. (Id. at ¶¶4-15.) On December 18, 2019, Plaintiff filed the instant Motion to Compel Responses to the Request for Production and Request for Sanctions (“the Motion”). To date, no opposition has been filed.

There is no requirement for a prior meet and confer effort before a motion to compel initial responses can be filed. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.300.) Further, the motion can be brought any time after the responding party fails to provide the responses. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.300.) In light of Defendant Mirage Auto Sales & Leasing, Inc.’s failure to provide responses, Plaintiff is entitled to an order that Defendant Mirage Auto Sales & Leasing, Inc.serve verified responses, without objection, to the Requests for Production.

The Court also finds Defendant Mirage Auto Sales & Leasing, Inc.’s failure to timely respond a misuse of the discovery process. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2023.010, subd. (d).) Sanctions are appropriate under Code of Civil Procedure sections 2023.010 and 2023.030, and have been properly noticed. However, the amount sought is excessive given the simplicity of this motion. The request for sanctions is granted jointly and severally against Defendant Mirage Auto Sales & Leasing, Inc. and its counsel of record in the amount of $375.00 based on one hour of attorney time billed at $375.00. (Motion, Johnson Decl., ¶6.)

Therefore, Plaintiff Alejandro Fuentes-Aguilar’s Motion to Compel Responses to Requests for Production and Request for Sanctions IS GRANTED. DEFENDANT MIRAGE AUTO SALES & LEASING, INC. IS TO SERVE VERIFIED RESPONSES TO THE REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS WITHOUT OBJECTION WITHIN 20 DAYS’ NOTICE OF THIS ORDER. DEFENDANT MIRAGE AUTO SALES & LEASING, INC. AND ITS COUNSEL OF RECORD ARE JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY TO PAY SANCTIONS OF $375.00 TO PLAINTIFF’S COUNSEL WITHIN 30 DAYS’ NOTICE OF THIS ORDER.

Moving party to give notice.

Case Number: 18STLC00326    Hearing Date: February 13, 2020    Dept: 26

Fuentes-Aguilar v. Mirage Auto Sales & Leasing, Inc., et al.

MOTION TO DEEM REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION ADMITTED; SANCTIONS

(CCP § 2033.280)

TENTATIVE RULING:

Plaintiff Alejandro Fuentes-Aguilar’s Motion to Deem Requests for Admission Admitted Against Defendant Mirage Auto Sales & Leasing, Inc. is GRANTED. DEFENDANT MIRAGE AUTO SALES & LEASING, INC. TO PAY SANCTIONS OF $375.00 TO PLAINITFF’S COUNSEL WITHIN 30 DAYS’ NOTICE OF THIS ORDER.

ANALYSIS:

On November 7, 2019, Plaintiff Alejandro Fuentes-Aguilar (“Plaintiff”) served Requests for Admissions, Set One, on Defendant Mirage Auto Sales & Leasing, Inc. (“Defendant Mirage”). (Motion, Johnson Decl., ¶4 and Exhs. 1-3.) To date, Plaintiff has not received verified responses to the discovery requests from Defendant Mirage. (Id. at ¶5.) As a result, Plaintiff filed the instant Motion to Deem the Truth of Matters Specified in Requests for Admissions Admitted Against Defendant Mirage and for Monetary Sanctions (the “Motion”) on December 18, 2019.

In violation of Code of Civil Procedure section 2033.250, Defendant Mirage has not provided verified responses to the discovery propounded by Plaintiff. Nor has Defendant Mirage filed an opposition to the Motion. There is no requirement for a prior meet and confer effort before a motion to deem requests for admission can be filed. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.280.) Further, the motion can be brought any time after the responding party fails to provide the responses. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.280.)

The Court finds the failure to respond a misuse of the discovery process. Sanctions are appropriate under Code of Civil Procedure sections 2023.010, 2023.030 and 2033.280 and have been properly noticed. However, the amount of sanctions requested is excessive given the simplicity of this unopposed Motion. Sanctions are granted against Defendant Mirage in the amount of $375.00, based on one hour of attorney time billed at $375.00 per hour. (Motion, Johnson Decl., ¶6.)

Based on the foregoing, Plaintiff Alejandro Fuentes-Aguilar’s Motion to Deem Requests for Admission Admitted Against Defendant Mirage Auto Sales & Leasing, Inc. is GRANTED. DEFENDANT MIRAGE AUTO SALES & LEASING, INC. TO PAY SANCTIONS OF $375.00 TO PLAINITFF’S COUNSEL WITHIN 30 DAYS’ NOTICE OF THIS ORDER.

Moving party to give notice.