EVELYN RAMOS VS 4688 HUNTINGTON DRIVE LLC ET AL

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC697672    Hearing Date: September 16, 2020    Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

Plaintiff, Evelyn Ramos filed this action against Defendant, 4688 Huntington Drive, LLC for damages arising from a slip and fall at Defendant’s property.

Currently, Defendant moves (1) to compel Plaintiff’s responses to supplemental interrogatories and RPDs, (2) to submit tardy expert witness information, and (3) to compel deposition of Plaintiff’s retained experts or exclude them from testifying at trial. Plaintiff opposes each of the motions. As of 9/10/20, no replies have been filed.

The court notes trial in this matter was originally set for 2/26/20. On 2/18/20, the court granted Defendant’s ex parte application to continue the trial, which continued the trial date to 5/13/20. However, the court’s order explicitly stated, “All discovery and motion cut-off dates remain closed, except for any motion hearing set according to the previously scheduled cut off dates. Counsel may reopen discovery by filing a noticed motion.” (Minute Order 2/18/20.) Based on current conditions, including, but not limited to, the spread of COVID-19, trial was the trial date was vacated and a trial setting conference was set for 9/16/20. (Minute Order 4/2/20.) This order did not reopen discovery. (See Beverly Hospital v. Superior Court (1993) 19 Cal.App.4th 1289, 1295 [“postponement or continuance of a trial does not automatically operate to reopen discovery.”]; Pelton-Shepherd Industries, Inc. v. Delta Packaging Products, Inc. (2008) 165 Cal.App.4th 1568, 1586 [“a party who notices a discovery motion to be heard after the discovery motion cutoff date does not have a right to have the motion heard.”].)

CCP § 2024.020 makes clear that all discovery must be completed at least 30 days prior to trial, and all discovery motions must be heard at least 15 days prior to trial; the section also makes clear that the original, not continued, trial date governs. § 2024.050 provides a mechanism to re-open discovery; Defendants in this case did not make a motion per § 2024.050. In light of the lack of an order re-opening discovery, the motion to compel responses, compel expert depositions, and motion to submit tardy expert list is denied.

While the court need not reach the other issues, the court notes Plaintiff filed a declaration on 7/21/20, providing that Plaintiff responded to all supplemental discovery requests on 7/16/20. The motion to compel responses appear to be moot considering the responses served on Defendant prior to the hearing.

Moreover, the court notes concerning Defendant’s motion to submit a tardy expert designation, CCP § 2034.710 permits the Court to relieve a party from his failure to timely designate experts, but this section makes clear that the motion must be heard prior to the discovery cut-off, unless exceptional circumstances are shown. Defendant does not allege any exceptional circumstances here. While Defendant’s counsel states Defendant’s prior attorney gave his notice of resignation one day before the expert witness designation was due, there is no explanation of why the prior attorney failed to serve the expert witness designation. Defendant’s current counsel merely asserts the prior attorney made a mistake and forgot to serve the expert designation, but there is no explanation of what the mistake was or why and how the prior attorney forgot to serve the expert witness designation.

The court notes trial in this matter was vacated because of the COVID-19 pandemic. The court encourages the parties to meet and confer concerning expert issues and attempt to resolve the issues without court intervention if possible.

Defendant’s motion to compel responses to supplemental discovery, motion to submit tardy expert witness information, and motion to compel Plaintiff’s expert’s depositions are denied.

Defendant is ordered to give notice.

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the court at sscdept31@lacourt.org indicating intention to submit on the tentative as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org.  If the department does not receive an email indicating the parties are submitting on the tentative and there are no appearances at the hearing, the motion may be placed off calendar. If a party submits on the tentative, the party’s email must include the case number and must identify the party submitting on the tentative. If the parties do not submit on the tentative, they should arrange to appear remotely.

Dated this 16^th day of September, 2020

Case Number: BC697672    Hearing Date: January 06, 2020    Dept: 3

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

Defendant propounded special interrogatories, set two on Plaintiff on 9/11/19. To date, despite an attempt to meet and confer, Plaintiff has not served responses. Defendant therefore seeks an order compelling Plaintiff to respond, without objections, to the outstanding discovery and to pay sanctions.

Defendant’s motion is granted. Plaintiff is ordered to serve verified responses to special interrogatories, set two, without objections, within ten days. CCP §2030.290(a),(b).

Sanctions are mandatory. §2030.290(c). Defendant seeks sanctions in the amount of $1600/motion. Defense Counsel bills at the rate of $325/hour, which the Court reduces to $200/hour. The Court awards the requested 1.3 hours to prepare the motion to compel. No opposition was filed and therefore no reply was necessary. The Court awards the requested two hours of appearance time. The Court awards a total of 3.3 hours of attorney time at the rate of $200/hour, for a total of $660 in attorneys’ fees. The Court also awards the filing fee of $60.

Sanctions are sought and imposed against Plaintiff and her attorney of record, jointly and severally; they are ordered to pay sanctions to Defendant, by and through counsel of record, in the total amount of $720, within twenty days.

Defendant is ordered to give notice.

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the court at sscdept3@lacourt.org indicating intention to submit on the tentative as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org.  If the department does not receive an email indicating the parties are submitting on the tentative and there are no appearances at the hearing, the motion may be placed off calendar. If a party submits on the tentative, the party’s email must include the case number and must identify the party submitting on the tentative.