This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 12/06/2020 at 19:07:52 (UTC).

BRENNAN LAW FIRM VS CHARLES DELATORRE

Case Summary

On 06/02/2020 BRENNAN LAW FIRM filed a Contract - Other Contract lawsuit against CHARLES DELATORRE. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Spring Street Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is JAMES E. BLANCARTE. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    *******4641

  • Filing Date:

    06/02/2020

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Contract - Other Contract

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Judge

JAMES E. BLANCARTE

 

Party Details

Plaintiff

BRENNAN LAW FIRM

Defendant

DELATORRE CHARLES DBA DELATORRE INVESTMENTS LLC

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorney

FITCH WILLIAM S.

Defendant Attorney

ALVAREZ-GLASMAN ARNOLD M.

Other Attorneys

BRENNAN MICHAEL A.

 

Court Documents

Notice of Change of Address or Other Contact Information - Notice of Change of Address or Other Contact Information

10/13/2020: Notice of Change of Address or Other Contact Information - Notice of Change of Address or Other Contact Information

Substitution of Attorney - Substitution of Attorney

8/4/2020: Substitution of Attorney - Substitution of Attorney

Proof of Service by Substituted Service - Proof of Service by Substituted Service

7/9/2020: Proof of Service by Substituted Service - Proof of Service by Substituted Service

Request for Entry of Default / Judgment - Request for Entry of Default / Judgment

7/9/2020: Request for Entry of Default / Judgment - Request for Entry of Default / Judgment

Notice of Rejection Default/Clerk's Judgment - Notice of Rejection Default/Clerk's Judgment

7/9/2020: Notice of Rejection Default/Clerk's Judgment - Notice of Rejection Default/Clerk's Judgment

Answer - Answer

7/17/2020: Answer - Answer

Complaint - Complaint

6/2/2020: Complaint - Complaint

Summons - Summons on Complaint

6/2/2020: Summons - Summons on Complaint

Civil Case Cover Sheet - Civil Case Cover Sheet

6/2/2020: Civil Case Cover Sheet - Civil Case Cover Sheet

First Amended Standing Order - First Amended Standing Order

6/2/2020: First Amended Standing Order - First Amended Standing Order

Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case - Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case

6/2/2020: Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case - Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case

 

Docket Entries

  • 06/06/2023
  • Hearing06/06/2023 at 08:30 AM in Department 25 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Order to Show Cause Re: Failure to File Proof of Service

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/30/2021
  • Hearing11/30/2021 at 08:30 AM in Department 25 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Non-Jury Trial

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/15/2020
  • DocketAddress for Michael A. Brennan (Attorney) updated

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/13/2020
  • DocketNotice of Change of Address or Other Contact Information; Filed by: Michael A. Brennan (Attorney)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/04/2020
  • DocketSubstitution of Attorney; Filed by: William S. Fitch (Attorney)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/17/2020
  • DocketAnswer; Filed by: Charles Delatorre (Defendant); As to: Brennan Law Firm (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/10/2020
  • DocketUpdated -- Request for Entry of Default / Judgment: As To Parties changed from Charles Delatorre (Defendant) to Charles Delatorre (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/10/2020
  • DocketUpdated -- Request for Entry of Default / Judgment: As To Parties changed from Charles Delatorre (Defendant) to Charles Delatorre (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/09/2020
  • DocketProof of Service by Substituted Service; Filed by: Brennan Law Firm (Plaintiff); As to: Charles Delatorre (Defendant); Proof of Mailing Date: 07/03/2020; Service Cost: 65.00; Service Cost Waived: No

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/09/2020
  • DocketDefault entered as to Charles Delatorre; On the Complaint filed by Brennan Law Firm on 06/02/2020

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/09/2020
  • DocketNotice of Rejection Default/Clerk's Judgment; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/09/2020
  • DocketRequest for Entry of Default / Judgment; Filed by: Brennan Law Firm (Plaintiff); As to: Charles Delatorre (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/02/2020
  • DocketNon-Jury Trial scheduled for 11/30/2021 at 08:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/02/2020
  • DocketOrder to Show Cause Re: Failure to File Proof of Service scheduled for 06/06/2023 at 08:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/02/2020
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by: Brennan Law Firm (Plaintiff); As to: Charles Delatorre (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/02/2020
  • DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by: Brennan Law Firm (Plaintiff); As to: Charles Delatorre (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/02/2020
  • DocketSummons on Complaint; Issued and Filed by: Brennan Law Firm (Plaintiff); As to: Charles Delatorre (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/02/2020
  • DocketNotice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/02/2020
  • DocketFirst Amended Standing Order; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/02/2020
  • DocketCase assigned to Hon. James E. Blancarte in Department 25 Spring Street Courthouse

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

b'

Case Number: 20STLC04641 Hearing Date: September 9, 2021 Dept: 25

PROCEEDINGS: MOTION\r\nFOR AN ORDER COMPELLING RESPONSES TO REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS AND\r\nAN AWARD OF SANCTIONS AGAINST CHARLES DELATORRE

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff\r\nBrennan Law Firm

\r\n\r\n

RESP. PARTY: Defendant Charles Delatorre

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS;\r\nREQUEST FOR SANCTIONS

\r\n\r\n

(CCP §2031.300)

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

TENTATIVE RULING:

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Plaintiff Brennan Law Firm’s Motion\r\nfor an Order Compelling Responses to Request for Production of Documents is\r\nGRANTED. Defendant Charles Delatorre is ordered to serve verified responses\r\nwithout objections to Plaintiff’s Inspection Demands, Set One, within thirty\r\n(30) days of notice of this order. Plaintiff’s request for sanctions is also\r\nGRANTED in the amount of $500.00 to be paid to Plaintiff’s counsel within\r\nthirty (30) days of notice of this order.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

SERVICE: \r\n

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

[X]\r\nProof of Service Timely Filed (CRC, rule 3.1300) OK

\r\n\r\n

[X]\r\nCorrect Address (CCP §§ 1013, 1013a) OK

\r\n\r\n

[X]\r\n16/21 Court Days Lapsed (CCP §§ 12c, 1005(b)) OK

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

OPPOSITION: Filed on August 26, 2021 [ ] Late [ ]\r\nNone

\r\n\r\n

REPLY: None filed as\r\nof September 7, 2021 [ ] Late [X] None

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

ANALYSIS:

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

I. \r\nBackground

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

On June 2, 2020, Plaintiff Brennan\r\nLaw Firm (“Plaintiff”) filed an action alleging breach of contract and open\r\nbook account causes of action against Defendant Charles Delatorre dba Delatorre\r\nInvestments, LLC (“Charles”). Defendant Charles filed an Answer on July 17,\r\n2020.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Plaintiff filed amendments to the\r\nComplaint substituting Mario Delatorre (“Mario”) for Doe 1 and De La Torre\r\nInvestments, LLC (“Investments, LLC”) for Doe 2. (12/23/20 Amendments to the\r\nComplaint.)

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

On August 5, 2021, Plaintiff filed\r\nthe instant Motion for an Order Compelling Responses to Request for Production\r\nof Documents and an Award of Sanctions (the “Motion”). Defendant Charles filed\r\nan opposition on August 26. No reply brief was filed.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

II. \r\nLegal\r\nStandard & Discussion

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

A. Request for Production

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

A party must respond to requests for production of\r\ndocuments within 30 days after service. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.260, subd.\r\n(a).) If a party to whom requests for production of documents are directed does\r\nnot provide timely responses, the requesting party may move for an order\r\ncompelling responses to the discovery. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.300, subd.\r\n(c).) The party also waives the right to make any objections, including one\r\nbased on privilege or work-product protection. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.300, subd.\r\n(a).) There is no time limit for a motion to compel responses to the production\r\nof documents other than the cut-off on hearing discovery motions 15 days before\r\ntrial. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2024.020, subd. (a); Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.300.) No meet and confer efforts are required\r\nbefore filing a motion to compel responses to the discovery. (Code Civ.\r\nProc., § 2031.300; Sinaiko Healthcare\r\nConsulting, Inc. v. Pacific Healthcare Consultants (2007) 148 Cal.App.4th\r\n390, 411.) (Emphasis added.)

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Here, Plaintiff’s counsel served\r\nDefendant Charles’ counsel with Inspection Demands, Set One, on September 14,\r\n2020 via regular mail. (Mot., Betty Decl., ¶ 2, Exh. 1.) As of the date this\r\nMotion was filed, Defendant Charles had not yet served any responses. (Id. at ¶ 3.)

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

In opposition, Defendant Charles\r\nstates he is working on responses and “assures this Court that he will provide\r\nresponses…in advance of the hearing on the instant [M]otion” making it moot.\r\n(Oppo., p. 2.) This is insufficient. Defendant Charles did not subsequently\r\nfile any documentary evidence demonstrating these responses were later served\r\non Plaintiff. Thus, Plaintiff is entitled to an order compelling Defendant\r\nCharles to provide verified responses without objections. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.300.)

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

B. Sanctions

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Code of Civil Procedure section 2023.030, subdivision (a)\r\nprovides, in pertinent part, that the court may impose a monetary sanction on a\r\nparty engaging in the misuse of the discovery process to pay the reasonable\r\nexpenses, including attorney’s fees, incurred by anyone as a result of that\r\nconduct. A misuse of the discovery process includes failing to respond or\r\nsubmit to an authorized method of discovery. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2023.010,\r\nsubd. (d).)

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

In opposition, Defendant Charles\r\nargues that the parties were engaged in settlement discussions and he believed\r\nthe matter would settle. (Oppo., p. 2.) For this reason, Defendant Charles did\r\nnot serve any responses to the discovery. (Id.)\r\nHe argues he acted with substantial justification in failing to respond to the\r\ndiscovery due to his belief that the matter would settle. (Id.)

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

First, Defendant Charles submits no\r\nevidence, not even a declaration from his attorney, in support of this\r\nopposition. Further, Defendant Charles cites no authority for the proposition\r\nthat parties may neglect their duty to timely respond to discovery if the\r\nparties are engaged in settlement discussions.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Thus, the Court finds Defendant\r\nCharles’ failure to timely respond to Plaintiff’s discovery requests a misuse\r\nof the discovery process.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Plaintiff seeks $500 in sanctions\r\nbased on 1.25 hours of attorney time billed at $395.00 per hour and one filing\r\nfee. (Mot., Betty Decl., ¶ 5.) The Court finds this request to be reasonable.\r\nSanctions are to be paid to Plaintiff’s counsel within thirty (30) days of\r\nnotice of this order.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

III. \r\nConclusion\r\n& Order

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff\r\nBrennan Law Firm’s Motion for an Order Compelling Responses to Request for\r\nProduction of Documents is GRANTED. Defendant Charles Delatorre is ordered to\r\nserve verified responses without objections to Plaintiff’s Inspection Demands,\r\nSet One, within thirty (30) days of notice of this order. Plaintiff’s request\r\nfor sanctions is also GRANTED in the amount of $500.00 to be paid to\r\nPlaintiff’s counsel within thirty (30) days of notice of this order.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Moving party is ordered to give\r\nnotice.

'
related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases where BRENNAN LAW FIRM is a litigant

Latest cases represented by Lawyer BRENNAN MICHAEL . A