JAMIE ARNETT VS JUAN JOSE BOJORGE ET AL

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

On November 3, 2017, plaintiff Jamie Arnett (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against defendants Juan Jose Bojorge,  Jarquin Trucking, and Marvin Jarquin dba Jarquin Trucking (collectively, “Defendants”) arising from a November 4, 2015 motor vehicle accident.  On December 4, 2019, Defendants served Form Interrogatories (Set One), Special Interrogatories (Set One), Requests for Production of Documents (Set One), and Request for Statement of Damages on Plaintiff.  No responses were received.  On July 19, Defendants sent Plaintiff a letter requesting responses.  Defendants did not receive a response and filed these motions on August 2, 2019.  

Where a party fails to serve timely responses to discovery requests, the court may make an order compelling responses.  (Code Civ. Proc., ;; 2030.290, 2031.300; Healthcare Consulting, Inc. v. Pacific Healthcare Consultants (2007) 148 Cal.App.4th 390, 403.)   A party that fails to serve timely responses waives any objections to the request, including ones based on privilege or the protection of attorney work product.  (Code Civ. Proc., ;; 2030.290, subd. (a), 2031.300, subd. (a).)  Unlike a motion to compel further responses, a motion to compel responses is not subject to a 45-day time limit and the propounding party has no meet and confer obligations.  (Sinaiko Healthcare Consulting, Inc., supra, 148 Cal.App.4th at p. 404.)

When a complaint is filed in an action to recover damages for personal injury or wrongful death, the defendant may at any time request a statement setting forth the nature and amount of damages being sought. (Code Civ. Proc. ; 425.11(b).)  The request shall be served upon the plaintiff, who shall serve a responsive statement as to the damages within 15 days. Id.) A defendant may petition a Court to order Plaintiff to serve a responsive statement of damages. Id.) 

Plaintiff does not oppose this Motion and it is undisputed that Plaintiff failed to serve discovery responses.  However, Defendants only filed one discovery motion seeking to compel responses to three sets of discovery.  Accordingly, Defendants’ Motion is GRANTED on the condition that Defendants pay two additional filing fees before the hearing date; Plaintiff is ordered to serve verified responses, without objections, to Defendants’ Form Interrogatories (Set One), Special Interrogatories (Set One), and Requests for Production of Documents (Set One) within twenty (20) days of the date of this Order.  

The Court also orders Plaintiff to serve a responsive statement of damages within twenty (20) days of the date of this Order. 

Where the court grants a motion to compel responses, sanctions shall be imposed against the party who unsuccessfully makes or opposes a motion to compel, unless the party acted with substantial justification or the sanction would otherwise be unjust.  (Code Civ. Proc., ; 2030.290, subd. (c), 2031.300, subd. (c).)  Defendants’ request for sanctions is GRANTED and the Court imposes sanctions against Plaintiff in the amount of $380.00, consisting of 3 hours at defense counsel’s hourly rate of $200.00 and $180.00 in filing fees.  

Moving party to give notice.

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at SSCDEPT27@lacourt.org indicating intention to submit on the tentative as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org.  

Dated this 29th day of June 2020