This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 09/16/2021 at 06:35:58 (UTC).

STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY VS BONIFACIO PALOMARES, ET AL.

Case Summary

On 03/17/2020 STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY filed a Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle lawsuit against BONIFACIO PALOMARES. 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 Other.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    *******2575

  • Filing Date:

    03/17/2020

  • Case Status:

    Other

  • Case Type:

    Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Judge

JAMES E. BLANCARTE

 

Party Details

Plaintiff

STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY

Defendants

PALOMARES BONIFACIO

HERNANDEZ MARIA

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorney

ESPINOSA TRISTAN

Defendant Attorney

HAMANN HOWARD

 

Court Documents

Notice of Ruling - Notice of Ruling

2/16/2021: Notice of Ruling - Notice of Ruling

Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint) - Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint)

2/16/2021: Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint) - Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint)

Proof of Service by Mail - Proof of Service by Mail

6/23/2021: Proof of Service by Mail - Proof of Service by Mail

Request for Dismissal - Request for Dismissal

6/23/2021: Request for Dismissal - Request for Dismissal

Opposition (name extension) - Opposition TO MOTION TO DEEM REQUESTS FOR ADMISSIONS ADMITTED; DECLARATION OF HOWARD E. HAMANN

1/8/2021: Opposition (name extension) - Opposition TO MOTION TO DEEM REQUESTS FOR ADMISSIONS ADMITTED; DECLARATION OF HOWARD E. HAMANN

Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint) - Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint)

1/25/2021: Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint) - Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint)

Reply (name extension) - Reply TO OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO DEEM RFA'S ADMITTED

1/25/2021: Reply (name extension) - Reply TO OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO DEEM RFA'S ADMITTED

Motion to Deem RFA's Admitted - Motion to Deem RFA's Admitted

10/30/2020: Motion to Deem RFA's Admitted - Motion to Deem RFA's Admitted

Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint) - Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint)

10/30/2020: Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint) - Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint)

Memorandum of Points & Authorities - Memorandum of Points & Authorities

10/30/2020: Memorandum of Points & Authorities - Memorandum of Points & Authorities

Declaration (name extension) - Declaration OF TRISTAN P ESPINOSA ESQ ISO MOTION TO DEEM RFA'S ADMITTED

10/30/2020: Declaration (name extension) - Declaration OF TRISTAN P ESPINOSA ESQ ISO MOTION TO DEEM RFA'S ADMITTED

Answer - Answer

6/22/2020: Answer - Answer

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

4/9/2020: Proof of Service by Substituted Service - Proof of Service by Substituted Service

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

4/9/2020: Proof of Service by Substituted Service - Proof of Service by Substituted Service

Complaint - Complaint

3/17/2020: Complaint - Complaint

Civil Case Cover Sheet - Civil Case Cover Sheet

3/17/2020: Civil Case Cover Sheet - Civil Case Cover Sheet

Declaration (name extension) - Declaration DECLARATION OF VENUE

3/17/2020: Declaration (name extension) - Declaration DECLARATION OF VENUE

First Amended Standing Order - First Amended Standing Order

3/17/2020: First Amended Standing Order - First Amended Standing Order

9 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 06/29/2021
  • DocketNon-Jury Trial scheduled for 09/14/2021 at 08:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25 Not Held - Vacated by Court on 06/29/2021

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/29/2021
  • DocketOrder to Show Cause Re: Failure to File Proof of Service scheduled for 03/21/2023 at 08:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25 Not Held - Vacated by Court on 06/29/2021

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/23/2021
  • DocketProof of Service by Mail; Filed by: STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY (Plaintiff); As to: BONIFACIO PALOMARES (Defendant); MARIA HERNANDEZ (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/23/2021
  • DocketOn the Complaint filed by STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY on 03/17/2020, entered Request for Dismissal with prejudice filed by STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY as to the entire action

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/16/2021
  • DocketNotice of Ruling; Filed by: STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/16/2021
  • DocketProof of Service (not Summons and Complaint); Filed by: STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY (Plaintiff); As to: BONIFACIO PALOMARES (Defendant); MARIA HERNANDEZ (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/02/2021
  • DocketMinute Order (Hearing on Motion to Deem Request for Admissions Admitted)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/02/2021
  • DocketHearing on Motion to Deem Request for Admissions Admitted scheduled for 02/02/2021 at 10:00 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25 updated: Result Date to 02/02/2021; Result Type to Held - Motion Granted

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/25/2021
  • DocketProof of Service (not Summons and Complaint); Filed by: STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY (Plaintiff); As to: BONIFACIO PALOMARES (Defendant); MARIA HERNANDEZ (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/25/2021
  • DocketReply TO OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO DEEM RFA'S ADMITTED; Filed by: STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
8 More Docket Entries
  • 04/09/2020
  • DocketProof of Service by Substituted Service; Filed by: STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY (Plaintiff); As to: BONIFACIO PALOMARES (Defendant); Proof of Mailing Date: 03/25/2020; Service Cost: 79.50; Service Cost Waived: No

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/18/2020
  • DocketNon-Jury Trial scheduled for 09/14/2021 at 08:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/18/2020
  • DocketOrder to Show Cause Re: Failure to File Proof of Service scheduled for 03/21/2023 at 08:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/18/2020
  • DocketCase assigned to Hon. James E. Blancarte in Department 25 Spring Street Courthouse

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/17/2020
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by: STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY (Plaintiff); As to: BONIFACIO PALOMARES (Defendant); MARIA HERNANDEZ (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/17/2020
  • DocketSummons on Complaint; Issued and Filed by: STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY (Plaintiff); As to: BONIFACIO PALOMARES (Defendant); MARIA HERNANDEZ (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/17/2020
  • DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by: STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY (Plaintiff); As to: BONIFACIO PALOMARES (Defendant); MARIA HERNANDEZ (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/17/2020
  • DocketDeclaration DECLARATION OF VENUE; Filed by: STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY (Plaintiff); As to: BONIFACIO PALOMARES (Defendant); MARIA HERNANDEZ (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/17/2020
  • DocketNotice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/17/2020
  • DocketFirst Amended Standing Order; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: 20STLC02575    Hearing Date: February 02, 2021    Dept: 25

HEARING DATE: Tue., February 2, 2021 JUDGE /DEPT: Blancarte/25

CASE NAME: State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Palomares, et al.

CASE NUMBER: 20STLC02575 COMPL. FILED: 03-17-20

NOTICE: OK DISC. C/O: 08-15-21

DISC. MOT. C/O: 08-30-21

TRIAL DATE: 09-14-21

PROCEEDINGS: MOTION TO DEEM REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION ADMITTED

MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company

RESP. PARTY: Defendant Bonifacio Palomares

MOTION TO DEEM REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION ADMITTED; REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS

(CCP § 2033.280)

TENTATIVE RULING:

Plaintiff State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company’s Motion to Deem Requests for Admission Admitted against Defendant Bonifacio Palomares is GRANTED. Plaintiff’s request for sanctions is also GRANTED. Defendant Palomares only is ordered to pay sanctions of $460.00 to Plaintiff’s counsel 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: Filed on January 8, 2021 [ ] Late [ ] None

REPLY: Filed on January 25, 2021 [ ] Late [ ] None

ANALYSIS:

  1. Background

On March 17, 2020, Plaintiff State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company (“Plaintiff”) filed an action against Defendants Bonifacio Palomares (“Palomares”) and Maria Hernandez (“Hernandez”) (collectively, “Defendants”). Defendants filed an Answer on June 22, 2020.

On October 30, 2020, Plaintiff filed the instant Motion to Deem Requests for Admissions Admitted (the “Motion”). Defendant Palomares filed an Opposition on January 8, 2021, and Plaintiff filed a Reply on January 25, 2021.

  1. Legal Standard & Discussion

A. 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 Palomares with Requests for Admission, Set One, on July 27, 2020 via email. (Mot., Espinosa Decl., p. 1:24-26, Exh. A.) Plaintiff’s counsel provided Defendant Palomares’ counsel with two extensions to respond to the discovery, the first to September 14, 2020 and the second to September 21, 2020. (Id. at p. 2:1-4.) Although not statutorily required, Plaintiff’s counsel sent Defendant Palomares’ counsel a letter regarding the lack of responses on October 13, 2020. (Id. at p. 2:4-6, Exh. B.) As of the date of this Motion, no responses to the discovery were served. (Id. at p. 2:6.)

In Opposition, Defendant Palomares’ counsel argues the Motion should be denied because he has been unable to locate his client to draft responses and obtain a verification. (Oppo., p. 2:2-10.) He further states he engaged a private investigator to locate Defendant Palomares, but was unsuccessful. (Id., Hamann Decl., ¶ 2.) However, Defendant Palomares’ apparent abandonment of the litigation does not warrant a denial of Plaintiff’s Motion. Indeed, the Court must grant a motion to deem requests for admission if a party fails to provide responses before the hearing. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.280, subd. (c).) Thus, Plaintiff is entitled to an order deeming the Request for Admissions, Set One, admitted against Defendant Palomares. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.280.)

B. Request for Sanctions

Code of Civil Procedure section 2023.030, subdivision (a) provides, in pertinent part, that the court may impose a monetary sanction on a party engaging in the misuse of the discovery process to pay the reasonable expenses, including attorney’s fees, incurred by anyone as a result of that conduct. A misuse of the discovery process includes failing to respond or to submit to an authorized method of discovery. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2023.010, subd. (d).) Furthermore, 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).)

The Court finds Defendant Palomares’ failure to respond to Plaintiff’s discovery request a misuse of the discovery process. In addition, the Court is required to impose a monetary sanction on Defendant Palomares for his failure to respond to the Request for Admissions under Code of Civil Procedure section 2033.280, subdivision (c).

Plaintiff’s counsel requests $460.00 in sanctions based on two hours of attorney time billed at $200.00 per hour and one filing fee of $60.00. (Mot., Espinosa Decl., p. 2:7-10.) The Court finds this to be reasonable. Defendant Palomares is to pay sanctions of $460.00 to Plaintiff’s counsel within thirty (30) days of notice of this order.

  1. Conclusion & Order

For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company’s Motion to Deem Requests for Admission Admitted against Defendant Bonifacio Palomares is GRANTED. Plaintiff’s request for sanctions is also GRANTED. Defendant Palomares only is ordered to pay sanctions of $460.00 to Plaintiff’s counsel within thirty (30) days of notice of this order.

Moving party is ordered to give notice.

related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases where State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company is a litigant

Latest cases represented by Lawyer ESPINOSA, TRISTAN P.