STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY VS PRECIOUS A. ALEXANDER

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: 19STLC07462    Hearing Date: October 29, 2020    Dept: 26

State Farm v. Alexander, et al.

MOTION TO DEEM REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION ADMITTED

(CCP § 2033.280)

TENTATIVE RULING:

Plaintiff State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company’s Motion to Deem Requests for Admission Admitted Against Defendant Precious A. Alexander is GRANTED. DEFENDANT PRECIOUS A. ALEXANDER IS TO PAY SANCTIONS OF $460.00 TO PLAINTIFF’S COUNSEL WITHIN 20 DAYS’ SERVICE OF THIS ORDER.

ANALYSIS:

On January 3, 2020, Plaintiff State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company (“Plaintiff”) served Requests for Admissions on Defendant Precious A. Alexander (“Defendant”). (Motion, Taylor Decl., Exh. 1.) Despite providing Defendant an extension of the time to serve responses, as of the filing of this Motion, Plaintiff had not received any verified responses to the discovery requests propounded on Defendant. (Id. at ¶¶4-8 and Exhs. 2-3.) As a result, Plaintiff filed the instant Motion to Deem the Truth of Matters Specified in Requests for Admissions to Defendant as Admitted and for Monetary Sanctions (the “Motion”) on June 18, 2020.

Defendant filed an oppostion on October 20, 2020.

Discussion

According to Plaintiff, Defendant had not provided verified responses to the discovery propounded by Plaintiff on October 15, 2019 as of the filing of the Motion. There is no requirement for a prior meet and confer effort before a motion to deem requests for admission can be filed. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.280.) Further, the motion can be brought any time after the responding party fails to provide the responses. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.280.) In opposition, Defendant contends that she failed to serve timely responses following the death of her father but has since served responses to the Requests for Admission on September 1, 2020. (Opp., Jalali Decl., ¶¶13-18.) No copy of the responses, however, is attached to the Opposition or supporting declaration. (Ibid.) The Court, therefore, cannot determine whether the responses to the Requests for Admission comply with the requirements of Code of Civil Procedure section 2033.210, et seq.

No legal authority grants this Court the power to ignore the express legislative mandate:

If a party to whom requests for admission are directed fails to serve a timely response, the following rules apply:

. . .

(b) 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 (commencing with Section 2023.010).

(c) The court shall make this order, unless it finds that the party to whom the requests for admission have been directed has served, before the hearing on the motion, a proposed response to the requests for admission that is in substantial compliance with Section 2033.220. It is mandatory that the court impose a monetary sanction under Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 2023.010) 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 (emphasis added).) Therefore, Plaintiff is entitled to an order deeming the Requests for Admission admitted. Sanctions are required under Code of Civil Procedure sections 2023.010, 2023.030 and 2033.280, and have been properly noticed. Sanctions are granted against Defendant in the amount of $460.00, based on two hours of attorney time billed at $200.00 per hour, plus the $60.00 filing fee. (Id. at p. 2:6-9.)

Based on the foregoing, Plaintiff’s Motion to Deem Requests for Admission Admitted Against Defendant Precious A. Alexander is GRANTED. DEFENDANT PRECIOUS A. ALEXANDER IS TO PAY SANCTIONS OF $460.00 TO PLAINTIFF’S COUNSEL WITHIN 20 DAYS’ SERVICE OF THIS ORDER.

Moving party to give notice.