This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 10/24/2020 at 03:45:58 (UTC).

COMMUNICATIONS RELAY, LLC VS BRANDON NAVARRO

Case Summary

On 04/10/2019 COMMUNICATIONS RELAY, LLC filed a Personal Injury - Other Personal Injury lawsuit against BRANDON NAVARRO. 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:

    *******3518

  • Filing Date:

    04/10/2019

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Personal Injury - Other Personal Injury

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Spring Street Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Judge

JAMES E. BLANCARTE

 

Party Details

Plaintiff

COMMUNICATIONS RELAY LLC

Defendant

NAVARRO BRANDON

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorney

WILKINSON CLAY

 

Court Documents

Motion to Compel Discovery (not Further Discovery) - 1 moving party, 1 motion - Motion to Compel Discovery (not Further Discovery) - 1 moving party, 1 motion

2/7/2020: Motion to Compel Discovery (not Further Discovery) - 1 moving party, 1 motion - Motion to Compel Discovery (not Further Discovery) - 1 moving party, 1 motion

Motion to Compel Discovery (not Further Discovery) - 1 moving party, 1 motion - Motion to Compel Discovery (not Further Discovery) - 1 moving party, 1 motion

2/7/2020: Motion to Compel Discovery (not Further Discovery) - 1 moving party, 1 motion - Motion to Compel Discovery (not Further Discovery) - 1 moving party, 1 motion

Motion to Compel Discovery (not Further Discovery) - 1 moving party, 1 motion - Motion to Compel Discovery (not Further Discovery) - 1 moving party, 1 motion

2/7/2020: Motion to Compel Discovery (not Further Discovery) - 1 moving party, 1 motion - Motion to Compel Discovery (not Further Discovery) - 1 moving party, 1 motion

Notice (name extension) - Notice of Non-Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion To Deem Requests For Admissions Admitted And Motions To Compel Responses To Special Interrogatories, Judicial Council Form Inte

3/4/2020: Notice (name extension) - Notice of Non-Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion To Deem Requests For Admissions Admitted And Motions To Compel Responses To Special Interrogatories, Judicial Council Form Inte

Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Motion to Compel Production)

3/9/2020: Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Motion to Compel Production)

Notice of Ruling - Notice of Ruling

3/10/2020: Notice of Ruling - Notice of Ruling

Notice of Posting of Jury Fees - Notice of Posting of Jury Fees

4/10/2020: Notice of Posting of Jury Fees - Notice of Posting of Jury Fees

Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order - Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order

4/16/2020: Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order - Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order

Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order - Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order

4/16/2020: Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order - Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order

Notice of Ruling - Notice of Ruling

7/8/2020: Notice of Ruling - Notice of Ruling

Motion for Terminating Sanctions - Motion for Terminating Sanctions

8/27/2020: Motion for Terminating Sanctions - Motion for Terminating Sanctions

Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order - Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order

10/2/2020: Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order - Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order

Notice (name extension) - Notice of Trial Continuance

10/6/2020: Notice (name extension) - Notice of Trial Continuance

Answer - Answer

5/24/2019: Answer - Answer

Proof of Personal Service - Proof of Personal Service

4/26/2019: Proof of Personal Service - Proof of Personal Service

Civil Case Cover Sheet - Civil Case Cover Sheet

4/10/2019: Civil Case Cover Sheet - Civil Case Cover Sheet

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

4/10/2019: Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case - Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case

Complaint - Complaint

4/10/2019: Complaint - Complaint

9 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 06/23/2021
  • Hearing06/23/2021 at 08:30 AM in Department 25 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Jury Trial

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/02/2021
  • Hearing02/02/2021 at 10:00 AM in Department 25 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Hearing on Motion for Terminating Sanctions

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/06/2020
  • DocketNotice of Trial Continuance; Filed by: Communications Relay, LLC (Plaintiff); As to: Brandon Navarro (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/02/2020
  • DocketNotice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/02/2020
  • DocketUpdated -- Event scheduled for 10/07/2020 at 08:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25 Type changed from Non-Jury Trial to Jury Trial

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/02/2020
  • DocketOn the Court's own motion, Jury Trial scheduled for 10/07/2020 at 08:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25 Not Held - Advanced and Continued - by Court was rescheduled to 06/23/2021 08:30 AM

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/27/2020
  • DocketMotion for Terminating Sanctions; Filed by: Communications Relay, LLC (Plaintiff); As to: Brandon Navarro (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/27/2020
  • DocketHearing on Motion for Terminating Sanctions scheduled for 02/02/2021 at 10:00 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/16/2020
  • DocketOrder to Show Cause Re: Failure to File Proof of Service scheduled for 04/13/2022 at 10:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25 Not Held - Vacated by Court on 07/16/2020

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/08/2020
  • DocketNotice of Ruling; Filed by: Communications Relay, LLC (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
24 More Docket Entries
  • 05/24/2019
  • DocketAnswer; Filed by: Brandon Navarro (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/26/2019
  • DocketProof of Personal Service; Filed by: Communications Relay, LLC (Plaintiff); As to: Brandon Navarro (Defendant); Service Date: 04/26/2019; Service Cost: 895.45; Service Cost Waived: No

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/10/2019
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by: Communications Relay, LLC (Plaintiff); As to: Brandon Navarro (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/10/2019
  • DocketSummons on Complaint; Issued and Filed by: Communications Relay, LLC (Plaintiff); As to: Brandon Navarro (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/10/2019
  • DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by: Communications Relay, LLC (Plaintiff); As to: Brandon Navarro (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/10/2019
  • DocketNotice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/10/2019
  • DocketFirst Amended Standing Order; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/10/2019
  • DocketNon-Jury Trial scheduled for 10/07/2020 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/10/2019
  • DocketOrder to Show Cause Re: Failure to File Proof of Service scheduled for 04/13/2022 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/10/2019
  • DocketCase assigned to Hon. James E. Blancarte in Department 94 Stanley Mosk Courthouse

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: 19STLC03518    Hearing Date: June 30, 2020    Dept: 25

MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO INTERROGATORIES; REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS

(CCP §§ 2030.290)

TENTATIVE RULING:

Plaintiff Communications Relay, LLC’s Motion to Compel Responses to Special Interrogatories is GRANTED. Defendant is ordered to provide verified responses without objections to Special Interrogatories within thirty (30) days of notice of this order.

SERVICE:

[X] Proof of Service Timely Filed (CRC, rule 3.1300) OK

[X] Correct Address (CCP §§ 1013, 1013a) OK

[X] 16/21 Court Days Lapsed (CCP §§ 12c, 1005(b)) OK

OPPOSITION: None filed as of June 25, 2020 [ ] Late [X] None

REPLY: None filed as of June 25, 2020 [ ] Late [X] None

ANALYSIS:

  1. Background

On April 10, 2019, Plaintiff Communications Relay, LLC (“Plaintiff”) filed an action for conversion, trespass to chattels, and general negligence against Defendant Brandon Navarro (“Defendant”). On May 24, 2019, Defendant filed an Answer, in pro per.

On February 7, 2020, Plaintiff filed (1) Motion to Compel Defendant Navarro’s Responses to Special Interrogatories, Set One, and Form Interrogatories, Set One (the “Interrogatories Motion”); (2) Motion to Deem Admitted Requests for Admission, Set One (the “RFA Motion”); and (3) Motion to Compel Defendant Navarro’s Responses to Request for Production of Documents, Set One (the “Production Motion”). No oppositions were filed.

On March 9, 2020, the Court granted Plaintiff’s request to compel Defendant’s responses to Form Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents, as well as its request to deem Requests for Admission admitted. (3/9/20 Minute Order.) However, the Court continued the hearing on Plaintiff’s request to compel responses to Special Interrogatories for failure to pay the required filing fee and ordered it to do so. (Id.) The Court also requested that Plaintiff’s counsel file a supplemental declaration detailing her hourly rate, time expended, and costs incurred to determine a reasonable award of attorney’s fees in connection with the RFA Motion. (Id.)

To date, no opposition to the Interrogatories Motion has been filed.

  1. Legal Standard & Discussion

A. Special Interrogatories

A party must respond to interrogatories within 30 days after service. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.260, subd. (a).) If a party to whom interrogatories are directed does not provide timely responses, the requesting party may move for an order compelling responses to the discovery. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.290, subd. (b).) The party also waives the right to make any objections, including one based on privilege or work-product protection. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.290, subd. (a).) There is no time limit for a motion to compel responses to interrogatories other than the cut-off on hearing discovery motions 15 days before trial. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2024.020, subd. (a); Code Civ. Proc., 2030.290.) No meet and confer efforts are required before filing a motion to compel responses to the discovery. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.290; Sinaiko Healthcare Consulting, Inc. v. Pacific Healthcare Consultants (2007) 148 Cal.App.4th 390, 411.)

Here, Plaintiff served Defendant with Special Interrogatories, Set One, on July 3, 2019 via regular mail. (Interrogatories Motion, Bachert Decl., ¶ 2, Exh. A.) Although not required, Plaintiff’s counsel sent Defendant a meet and confer letter regarding the lack of discovery responses on October 10, 2019. (Id. at ¶ 5, Exh. C.) As of the date of this Interrogatories Motion, Plaintiff has not received any responses to its discovery request. (Id. at ¶ 7.) Thus, Plaintiff is entitled to an order compelling Defendant to provide verified responses to Special Interrogatories without objections. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.290.)

B. Sanctions for Failure to Respond to Requests for Admission

As noted in the March 9, 2020 Order, it is “mandatory that the Court impose a monetary sanction…on the party or attorney, or both, whose failure to serve a timely response to requests for admission necessitated this motion.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.280, subd. (c).) Although the Court granted Plaintiff’s request to deem Requests for Admission admitted against Defendant Navarro, it requested a supplemental declaration from Plaintiff’s counsel as to her hourly rate and time expended on the RFA Motion so it could determine the appropriate amount of sanctions to award. (3/9/20 Minute Order.)

On March 10, 2020, Plaintiff filed and served a Notice of Ruling indicating that it waived monetary sanctions in relation to its RFA Motion. (3/10/20 Notice of Ruling, p. 2:1-4.) Thus, no monetary sanctions are awarded.

  1. Conclusion & Order

For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff Communications Relay, LLC’s Motion to Compel Responses to Special Interrogatories is GRANTED. Defendant is ordered to provide verified responses without objections to Special Interrogatories within thirty (30) days of notice of this order.

Moving party is ordered to give notice.

Case Number: 19STLC03518    Hearing Date: March 09, 2020    Dept: 25

MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO INTERROGATORIES; MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS; MOTION TO DEEM ADMITTED REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION

(CCP §§ 2030.290; 2031.300; 2033.280)

TENTATIVE RULING:

Plaintiff Communications Relay, LLC’s (1) Motion to Compel Defendant Navarro’s Reponses to Form Interrogatories, Set One, (2) Motion to Deem Admitted Requests for Admission, Set One, and (3) Motion to Compel Defendant Navarro’s Responses to Request for Production of Documents, Set One, are GRANTED. Defendant is ordered to provide verified responses without objections to Form Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents within thirty (30) days of service of notice of this order.

The hearing on Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Responses to Special Interrogatories, Set One, and request for sanctions is CONTINUED to APRIL 29, 2020 at 10:30 a.m. in Department 25 at the SPRING STREET COURTHOUSE. Plaintiff is ordered to pay an additional filing fee for the Special Interrogatories motion. In addition, at least 16 court days before the next scheduled hearing, Plaintiff must file and serve supplemental papers as requested herein. Failure to obey the Court’s order may result in the motion being placed off calendar or denied.

ANALYSIS:

  1. Background

On April 10, 2019, Plaintiff Communications Relay, LLC (“Plaintiff”) filed an action for conversion, trespass to chattels, and general negligence against Defendant Brandon Navarro (“Defendant”). On May 24, 2019, Defendant filed an Answer, in pro per.

On February 7, 2020, Plaintiff filed the instant (1) Motion to Compel Defendant Navarro’s Reponses to Special Interrogatories, Set One, and Form Interrogatories, Set One (the “Interrogatories Motion”); (2) Motion to Deem Admitted Requests for Admission, Set One (the “RFA Motion”); and (3) Motion to Compel Defendant Navarro’s Responses to Request for Production of Documents, Set One (the “Production Motion”) (collectively, the “Motions”). To date, no opposition has been filed.

  1. Legal Standard & Discussion

  1. Improper Combination of Discovery Motions

As an initial matter, the Court notes that Plaintiff impermissibly attempts to combine multiple requests for relief into a single motion. Specifically, Plaintiff moves the Court to compel Plaintiff’s responses to Form Interrogatories and Special Interrogatories in one motion. However, filing as a single motion negatively impacts the Court’s calendar by placing more motions on the calendar than slots have been provided by the online reservation system.

In addition, combining discovery motions allows the moving party to avoid paying the requisite filing fees. Statutorily required filing fees are jurisdictional and “it is mandatory for the court clerks to demand and receive statutorily required filing fees.” (See Duran v. St. Luke’s Hospital (2003) 114 Cal.App.4th 457, 460.) Here, Defendant has only paid one filing fee for what should have been two separate motions.

Accordingly, Plaintiff is ordered to pay one additional filing fee for the Motion to Compel Responses to Special Interrogatories, Set One. The Court will only rule as to the request to compel responses to Form Interrogatories, Set One.

  1. Form Interrogatories & Request for Production of Documents

A party must respond to interrogatories and requests for production of documents within 30 days after service. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.260, subd. (a); Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.260, subd. (a).) If a party to whom interrogatories or requests for production of documents are directed does not provide timely responses, the requesting party may move for an order compelling responses to the discovery. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.290, subd. (b); Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.300, subd. (c).) The party also waives the right to make any objections, including one based on privilege or work-product protection. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.290, subd. (a); Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.300, subd. (a).) There is no time limit for a motion to compel responses to interrogatories or production of documents other than the cut-off on hearing discovery motions 15 days before trial. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2024.020, subd. (a), 2030.290; Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.300.) No meet and confer efforts are required before filing a motion to compel responses to the discovery. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.290; Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.300; Sinaiko Healthcare Consulting, Inc. v. Pacific Healthcare Consultants (2007) 148 Cal.App.4th 390, 411.)

Here, Plaintiff served Defendant with Form Interrogatories, Set One, and Request for Production of Documents, Set One, on July 3, 2019, by mail. (Interrogatories Mot., Bachert Decl., ¶ 3, Exh. B; Production Mot., Bachert Decl., ¶ 2, Exh. A.) Although not required, Plaintiff’s counsel sent Defendant a meet and confer letter on October 10, 2019 regarding the lack of responses to the discovery. (Interrogatories Mot., Bachert Decl., at ¶ 5, Exh. C; Production Mot., Bachert Decl., ¶ 4, Exh. B.) To date, Plaintiff has not received any responses. (Interrogatories Mot., Bachert Decl., at ¶¶ 6-7; Production Mot., Bachert Decl., ¶¶ 5-6.) Thus, Plaintiff is entitled to an order compelling Defendant to provide verified responses to Form Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents without objections. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.290; 2031.300.)

  1. Requests for Admission

A party must respond to requests for admissions within 30 days after service of such requests. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.250, subd. (a).) “If a party to whom requests for admission are directed fails to serve a timely response…(a) [that party] waives any objection to the requests, including one based on privilege or on the protection for work product…” (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.280, subd. (a).) “The requesting party may move for an order that the genuineness of any documents and the truth of any matters specified in the requests be deemed admitted, as well as for a monetary sanction under Chapter 7.” (Id. at subd. (b).) A motion dealing with the failure to respond, rather than with inadequate responses, does not require the requesting party to meet and confer with the responding party. (Deymer v. Costa Mesa Mobile Home Estates (1995) 36 Cal.App.4th 393, 395, fn. 4 [disapproved on other grounds in Wilcox v. Birtwhistle (1999) 21 Cal.4th 973]. There is no time limit within which a motion to have matters deemed admitted must be made. (Brigante v. Huang (1993) 20 Cal.App.4th 1569, 1585.)

Here, Plaintiff served Defendant with Requests for Admission, Set One, on July 3, 2019, by mail. (RFA Mot., Bachert Decl., ¶ 2, Exh. A.) Although not required, on October 10, 2019, Plaintiff’s counsel sent Defendant a meet and confer regarding the lack of discovery responses. (Id. at ¶4, Exh. B.) To date, Plaintiff has not received any responses. (Id. at ¶¶ 5-6.) Thus, Plaintiff is entitled to an order deeming the Request for Admissions, Set One, admitted against Defendant. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.280.)

  1. Sanctions

Code of Civil Procedure section 2033.280 states that it is “mandatory that the Court impose a monetary sanction…on the party or attorney, or both, whose failure to serve a timely response to requests for admission necessitated this motion.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.280, subd. (c).) However, as Plaintiff’s counsel’s declaration does not detail her hourly rate, time spent preparing this RFA Motion, or filing costs, the Court cannot determine the proper amount of sanctions at this time. Thus, Plaintiff’s counsel is ordered to submit a supplemental declaration providing this information.

  1. Conclusion & Order

Plaintiff Communications Relay, LLC’s (1) Motion to Compel Defendant Navarro’s Reponses to Form Interrogatories, Set One, (2) Motion to Deem Admitted Requests for Admission, Set One, and (3) Motion to Compel Defendant Navarro’s Responses to Request for Production of Documents, Set One, are GRANTED. Defendant is ordered to provide verified responses without objections to Form Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents within thirty (30) days of service of notice of this order.

The hearing on Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Responses to Special Interrogatories, Set One, and request for sanctions is CONTINUED to APRIL 29, 2020 at 10:30 a.m. in Department 25 at the SPRING STREET COURTHOUSE. Plaintiff is ordered to pay an additional filing fee for the Special Interrogatories motion. In addition, at least 16 court days before the next scheduled hearing, Plaintiff must file and serve supplemental papers as requested herein. Failure to obey the Court’s order may result in the motion being placed off calendar or denied.

Moving party is ordered to give notice.