On 04/11/2017 DAVID K GOTTLIEB filed a Contract - Other Contract lawsuit against LOU ALEXANDER. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is NANCY L. NEWMAN. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.
Pending - Other Pending
Los Angeles County Superior Courts
Stanley Mosk Courthouse
Los Angeles, California
NANCY L. NEWMAN
GOTTLIEB DAVID K.
MCDOW ASHLEY M.
LEONARD RICHARD C.
4/11/2017: Civil Case Cover Sheet
7/20/2017: Case Management Statement
10/31/2017: Minute Order
1/31/2018: Substitution of Attorney
2/27/2018: Minute Order
2/27/2018: Substitution of Attorney
4/2/2018: Notice of Ruling
5/11/2018: Case Management Statement
5/21/2018: Case Management Statement
8/28/2018: Order Appointing Court Approved Reporter as Official Reporter Pro Tempore
11/16/2018: Notice of Case Reassignment and Order for Plaintiff to Give Notice
4/25/2019: Stipulation and Order
at 08:30 AM in Department P; Status Conference - Not Held - Vacated by CourtRead MoreRead Less
Stipulation and Order (JOINT STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER TO EXTEND TRIAL AND DISCOVERY DEADLINES); Filed by DAVID K. GOTTLIEB (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
Notice (Notice of Withdrawal of Attorney of Record); Filed by DAVID K. GOTTLIEB (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
Notice (of Case Reassignment); Filed by DAVID K. GOTTLIEB (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
Notice of Case Reassignment and Order for Plaintiff to Give Notice; Filed by ClerkRead MoreRead Less
Order Appointing Court Approved Reporter as Official Reporter Pro TemporeRead MoreRead Less
at 08:30 AM in Department P; Case Management Conference (Conference-Case Management; Trial Date Set) -Read MoreRead Less
at 08:30 am in Department WEP, Nancy L. Newman, Presiding; Conference-Case Management - Trial Date SetRead MoreRead Less
Statement-Case Management; Filed by Attorney for DefendantRead MoreRead Less
Minute order entered: 2018-05-21 00:00:00; Filed by ClerkRead MoreRead Less
Miscellaneous-Other; Filed by DAVID K. GOTTLIEB (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
Case Management Statement; Filed by DAVID K. GOTTLIEB (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
Statement-Case Management; Filed by Attorney for PlaintiffRead MoreRead Less
Motion to Compel (ARBITRATION ); Filed by Attorney for DefendantRead MoreRead Less
Motion to Compel; Filed by LOU ALEXANDER (Defendant)Read MoreRead Less
Summons; Filed by PlaintiffRead MoreRead Less
Civil Case Cover SheetRead MoreRead Less
Summons Filed; Filed by Attorney for PlaintiffRead MoreRead Less
Complaint FiledRead MoreRead Less
Complaint; Filed by DAVID K. GOTTLIEB (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
Case Number: SC127359 Hearing Date: February 28, 2020 Dept: P
David K. Gottlieb v. Lou Alexander Case No. SC127359
Hearing Date: February 28, 2020
Plaintiff’s Motions to Compel Discovery (UNOPPOSED)
Plaintiff served form interrogatories, special interrogatories, requests for production of documents and requests for admission on July 24, 2019. Despite multiple extensions, defendant has not responded. Plaintiff moves to compel.
A party may move to compel production if the party in receipt of proper written discovery requests, including interrogatories and requests for production of documents, does not timely respond. Cal. Code Civ. Proc. §§2030.300, 2031.300. If a party fails to timely respond to a request for admissions, the requesting party may move for an order that the truth of any matters specified in the requests be deemed admitted. Cal. Code Civ. Proc. §0233.280. A court may impose monetary sanctions (Cal. Code Civ. Proc. §2023.010) for failure to engage in the discovery process.
Plaintiff provides copies of the propounded discovery, with a proof of service dated July 24, 2019. Plaintiff’s Exhibits A-D. A declaration from counsel states as of February 4, 2020, defendant has not responded. Defendant does not oppose. The motion is GRANTED.
Defendant to respond without objections to the interrogatories and requests for production within 20 days. All matters in the requests for admission are deemed admitted. Sanctions are warranted. Plaintiff requests $4,000.00 in costs and fees, as well as an additional $1,500.00 for anticipated additional briefing. Atallah Decl. at ¶12. As defendant did not oppose the motions, no further briefing was required, and the additional $1,500.00 was not incurred. $4,000.00 is excessive, given the straightforward nature of these motions and plaintiff’s failure to provide justification for his claimed costs and fees. Defendant to pay $2,000.00 in sanctions, within 30 days.