ALEJO MENDEZ VS GEORGE BARDEKJIAN

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: 19STLC01184    Hearing Date: July 07, 2020    Dept: 26

Mendez v. Bardekjian, et al.

MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO INTERROGATORIES

(CCP § 2030.290)

TENTATIVE RULING:

Plaintiff Alejo Mendez’s Motion Compelling Defendant George Bardekjian as Trustee of the Bardekjian Family Revocable Trust To Respond To Special Interrogatories, Set One, and for Monetary Sanctions is DEEMED MOOT AS TO THE RESPONSES AND GRANTED AS TO THE SANCTIONS. DEFENDANT AND DEFENSE COUNSEL ARE JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY ORDERED TO PAY SANCTIONS OF $950.00 TO PLAINTIFF’S COUNSEL WITHIN 30 DAYS’ NOTICE OF THIS ORDER.

ANALYSIS:

Plaintiff Alejo Mendez (“Plaintiff”) propounded Special Interrogatories, Set One, on Defendant George Bardekjian as Trustee of the Bardekjian Family Revocable Trust (“Defendant”) on November 22, 2019. (Motion, Mehrban Decl., Exh. A.) Following Defendant’s failure to provide timely responses, Plaintiff extended the deadline to respond to January 10, 2020. (Opp., Manoukian Decl., Exh. A.) Thereafter, Plaintiff’s counsel did not respond to defense counsel’s requests for further extensions of the time to respond. (Id. at Exhs. B-C.) Plaintiff filed the instant Motion on January 14, 2020. Defendant filed an opposition on March 18, 2020.

There is no requirement for a prior meet and confer effort before a motion to compel initial responses can be filed. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.290.) Further, the motion can be brought any time after the responding party fails to provide the responses. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.290.) Based on the foregoing, Plaintiff is entitled to an order compelling Defendant to serve verified responses without objections. It appears that on March 17, 2020, Defendant served verified responses without objection. (Opp., Exh. E.) Unless Plaintiff contends those responses are inadequate, the request to compel responses is moot.

hr However, Defendant’s failure to timely respond constitutes 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. Pursuant to a lodestar calculation, the request for sanctions is granted against Defendant and counsel of record in the amount of $475.00 based on one hour of attorney time billed at $475.00 an hour. (Motion, Mehrban Decl., ¶5.) The sanctions are to be paid within 30 days this order.

Plaintiff Alejo Mendez’s Motion Compelling Defendant George Bardekjian as Trustee of the Bardekjian Family Revocable Trust To Respond To Special Interrogatories, Set One, and for Monetary Sanctions is DEEMED MOOT AS TO THE RESPONSES AND GRANTED AS TO THE SANCTIONS. DEFENDANT AND DEFENSE COUNSEL ARE JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY ORDERED TO PAY SANCTIONS OF $475.00 TO PLAINTIFF’S COUNSEL WITHIN 30 DAYS’ NOTICE OF THIS ORDER.

Moving party to give notice.

Case Number: 19STLC01184    Hearing Date: November 20, 2019    Dept: 94

Mendez v. Bardekjian et al.

MOTION TO SET ASIDE DEFAULT AND DEFAULT JUDGMENT

(CCP § 473, subd. (b))

TENTATIVE RULING:

Defendant George Bardekjian’s Motion to Set Aside Default Judgment is GRANTED.

ANALYSIS:

Plaintiff Alejo Mendez (“Plaintiff”) sues Defendant George Bardekjian, as trustee of the Bardekjian Family Revocable Trust, (“Defendant”) for damages arising from Defendant’s alleged violation of the Unruh Civil Rights Act in failing to maintain his parking lot with a van-accessible handicap parking spot and adjacent aisle. On February 15, 2019, Plaintiff initiated this action asserting a sole cause of action for violation of the Unruh Civil Rights Act (Civil Code Section 51). Default was entered against Defendant on April 29, 2019, and a default judgment was entered against him on June 3, 2019. On May 15, 2019, Defendant filed an answer to the complaint.

On August 29, 2019, Defendant filed a Motion to Vacate Default Judgment (the “Motion”) under Code of Civil Procedure section 473, subdivision (b). The court is not in receipt of any opposition.

The matter was originally set for hearing on October 9, 2019. On October 2, 2019, the court continued the hearing to November 20, 2019.

Code of Civil Procedure, section 473, subdivision (b) provides that an application for relief must be made no more than six months after entry of the order from which relief is sought, and must be accompanied by an affidavit of fault attesting to the mistake, inadvertence, surprise or neglect of the moving party or its attorney. (Code Civ. Proc., § 473, subd. (b); English v. IKON Business Solutions (2001) 94 Cal.App.4th 130, 143.) “Under this [attorney affidavit] provision, a party is relieved from the consequences of his or her attorney’s mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or neglect. Relief is available regardless of whether the attorney’s neglect is excusable. [Citations.] Moreover, if the requirements of this provision are met, then relief is mandatory.” (Lorenz v. Commercial Acceptance Ins. Co. (1995) 40 Cal.App.4th 981, 989.)

The instant motion was timely brought less than six months after judgment was entered on June 3, 2019. It is also supported by the declaration of Defendant’s attorney, Nigol Manoukian (“Manoukian”), who states that although he made efforts to reach Plaintiff’s counsel in April 2019, but he ultimately failed to timely file an answer to Plaintiff’s complaint, for which he assumes full responsibility. (Motion, Manoukian Decl., ¶¶ 6-8.)

As the motion is timely and accompanied by an attorney affidavit of fault, Defendant is entitled to relief from default and default judgment. The April 29, 2019 default and June 3, 2019 default judgment are vacated.

Moving party to give notice.