This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 10/15/2021 at 02:32:54 (UTC).

STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY VS JOSE ESCOBAR

Case Summary

On 11/10/2020 STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY filed a Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle lawsuit against JOSE ESCOBAR. 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:

    *******9472

  • Filing Date:

    11/10/2020

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • 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

Defendant

ESCOBAR JOSE

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorney

ESPINOSA TRISTAN P.

Defendant Attorney

BARRENO ALEXANDRA

 

Court Documents

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

11/10/2020: Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case - Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case

First Amended Standing Order - First Amended Standing Order

11/10/2020: First Amended Standing Order - First Amended Standing Order

Declaration (name extension) - Declaration of Venue

11/10/2020: Declaration (name extension) - Declaration of Venue

Civil Case Cover Sheet - Civil Case Cover Sheet

11/10/2020: Civil Case Cover Sheet - Civil Case Cover Sheet

Complaint - Complaint

11/10/2020: Complaint - Complaint

Summons - Summons on Complaint

11/10/2020: Summons - Summons on Complaint

Declaration re: Due Diligence - Declaration re: Due Diligence

12/21/2020: Declaration re: Due Diligence - Declaration re: Due Diligence

Answer - Answer

3/8/2021: Answer - Answer

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

4/20/2021: Notice of Change of Address or Other Contact Information - Notice of Change of Address or Other Contact Information

Memorandum of Points & Authorities - Memorandum of Points & Authorities

8/11/2021: Memorandum of Points & Authorities - Memorandum of Points & Authorities

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

8/11/2021: Declaration (name extension) - Declaration OF TRISTAN P ESPINOSA ESQ ISO MOTION TO DEEM RFA'S ADMITTED

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

8/11/2021: Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint) - Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint)

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

8/11/2021: Motion to Deem RFA's Admitted - Motion to Deem RFA's Admitted

Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Motion to Deem Request for Admissions Admitted)

9/30/2021: Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Motion to Deem Request for Admissions Admitted)

2 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 11/14/2023
  • Hearing11/14/2023 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
  • 05/10/2022
  • Hearing05/10/2022 at 08:30 AM in Department 25 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Non-Jury Trial

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/30/2021
  • DocketMinute Order (Hearing on Motion to Deem Request for Admissions Admitted)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/30/2021
  • DocketHearing on Motion to Deem Request for Admissions Admitted scheduled for 09/30/2021 at 10:00 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25 updated: Result Date to 09/30/2021; Result Type to Held - Motion Granted

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/11/2021
  • DocketMotion to Deem RFA's Admitted; Filed by: STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY (Plaintiff); As to: JOSE ESCOBAR (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/11/2021
  • DocketProof of Service (not Summons and Complaint); Filed by: STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY (Plaintiff); As to: JOSE ESCOBAR (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/11/2021
  • DocketDeclaration OF TRISTAN P ESPINOSA ESQ ISO MOTION TO DEEM RFA'S ADMITTED; Filed by: STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/11/2021
  • DocketMemorandum of Points & Authorities; Filed by: STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/11/2021
  • DocketUpdated -- Motion to Deem RFA's Admitted AND OF NONAPPEARANCE: Name Extension: AND OF NONAPPEARANCE; As To Parties changed from JOSE ESCOBAR (Defendant) to JOSE ESCOBAR (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/11/2021
  • DocketHearing on Motion to Deem Request for Admissions Admitted scheduled for 09/30/2021 at 10:00 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25

    Read MoreRead Less
3 More Docket Entries
  • 12/21/2020
  • DocketDeclaration re: Due Diligence; Filed by: STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY (Plaintiff); As to: JOSE ESCOBAR (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/10/2020
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by: STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY (Plaintiff); As to: JOSE ESCOBAR (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/10/2020
  • DocketDeclaration of Venue; Filed by: STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY (Plaintiff); As to: JOSE ESCOBAR (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/10/2020
  • DocketSummons on Complaint; Issued and Filed by: STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY (Plaintiff); As to: JOSE ESCOBAR (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/10/2020
  • DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by: STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY (Plaintiff); As to: JOSE ESCOBAR (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/10/2020
  • DocketNotice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/10/2020
  • DocketFirst Amended Standing Order; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/10/2020
  • DocketNon-Jury Trial scheduled for 05/10/2022 at 08:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/10/2020
  • DocketOrder to Show Cause Re: Failure to File Proof of Service scheduled for 11/14/2023 at 08:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/10/2020
  • DocketCase assigned to Hon. James E. Blancarte in Department 25 Spring Street Courthouse

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

b'

Case Number: 20STLC09472 Hearing Date: September 30, 2021 Dept: 25

PROCEEDINGS: MOTION\r\nTO DEEM REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION ADMITTED

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff\r\nState Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company

\r\n\r\n

RESP. PARTY: None

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

MOTION TO DEEM REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION ADMITTED; REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS

\r\n\r\n

(CCP § 2033.280)

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

TENTATIVE RULING:

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Plaintiff State Farm Mutual Automobile\r\nInsurance Company’s Motion to Deem Requests for Admission Admitted is GRANTED.\r\nPlaintiff’s request for sanctions is also GRANTED in the amount of $360.00 to\r\nbe paid to Plaintiff’s counsel within thirty (30) days of service of this\r\norder.

\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: None filed as of September\r\n28, 2021 [ ] Late [X] None

\r\n\r\n

REPLY: None filed as\r\nof September 28, 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\r\n

On November 10, 2020, Plaintiff State Farm Mutual\r\nAutomobile Insurance Company (“Plaintiff”) filed an action against Defendant\r\nJose Escobar (“Defendant”) seeking damages of $6,766.77. Defendant filed an\r\nAnswer on March 8, 2021.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Plaintiff filed the instant Motion to Deem Requests for\r\nAdmissions Admitted (the “Motion”) on August 11, 2021. No opposition was filed.\r\n

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

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

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

A. Requests for\r\nAdmission

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

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

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Here, Plaintiff’s counsel served Defendant’s counsel with\r\nRequests for Admission, Set One, on April 26, 2021 via email. (Mot., Espinosa\r\nDecl., ¶ 1, Exh. A.) Plaintiff’s counsel granted Defendant’s counsel an\r\nextension to respond until June 29, 2021. (Id. at ¶ 2.) Plaintiff\r\nreceived Defendant’s responses to the discovery on June 29, but without any\r\nverifications. (Id.) Unverified responses are tantamount to no responses\r\nat all. (Appleton v. Superior Court (1988) 206 Cal.App.3d 632, 635-36.)\r\nPlaintiff’s counsel sent Defendant’s counsel a meet and confer letter regarding\r\nthe missing verifications on July 8 and granted an extension to remedy the\r\ndefect until July 30. (Mot., Espinosa Decl., ¶¶ 4-5.) As of the date this\r\nMotion was filed, Plaintiff had not received any verifications. Thus, Plaintiff\r\nis entitled to an order deeming the Requests for Admission, Set One, admitted\r\nagainst Defendant. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.280.)

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

B. Request for 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 to\r\nsubmit to an authorized method of discovery. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2023.010,\r\nsubd. (d).) Furthermore, it is “mandatory that the Court impose a monetary\r\nsanction…on the party or attorney, or both, whose failure to serve a timely\r\nresponse to requests for admission necessitated this motion.” (Code Civ. Proc.,\r\n§ 2033.280, subd. (c).)

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

The Court finds Defendant’s failure\r\nto serve timely, verified responses a misuse of the discovery process. In\r\naddition, the Court is required to impose a monetary sanction on Defendant for his\r\nfailure to respond to the Requests for Admission under Code of Civil Procedure section\r\n2033.280, subdivision (c).

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Plaintiff seeks sanctions of $460.00\r\nbased on two hours of attorney time billed at $200.00 per hour and one filing\r\nfee of $60.00. (Mot., Espinosa Decl., ¶ 7.) However, the amount sought is\r\nexcessive given the simplicity of this Motion and the lack of opposition and\r\nreply. The Court finds $360.00, based on 1.5 hours of attorney time and one\r\nfiling fee, to be reasonable.

\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\nState Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company’s Motion to Deem Requests for\r\nAdmission Admitted is GRANTED. Plaintiff’s request for sanctions is also\r\nGRANTED in the amount of $360.00 to be paid to Plaintiff’s counsel within\r\nthirty (30) days of service 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 State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company is a litigant

Latest cases represented by Lawyer BARRENO ALEXANDRA