This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 10/17/2020 at 05:15:11 (UTC).

JOHN CHOE VS AMERICAN EAGLE TRANSPORTATION CORP

Case Summary

On 04/11/2018 JOHN CHOE filed a Personal Injury - Other Personal Injury lawsuit against AMERICAN EAGLE TRANSPORTATION CORP. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Pomona Courthouse South located in Los Angeles, California. The Judges overseeing this case are CHRISTOPHER K. LUI, SAMANTHA JESSNER and GLORIA WHITE-BROWN. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****1556

  • Filing Date:

    04/11/2018

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Personal Injury - Other Personal Injury

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Pomona Courthouse South

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Presiding Judges

CHRISTOPHER K. LUI

SAMANTHA JESSNER

GLORIA WHITE-BROWN

 

Party Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner

CHOE JOHN

Defendants and Respondents

AMERICAN EAGLE TRANSPORTATION CORP.

DOES 1 TO 50

X-SPEED TRANSPORTATION INC. (DOE 1)

X-SPEED TRANSPORTATION INC. DOE 1

KIM PETER

KIM JOHN C.

JUN PAUL H.

PREMIER LOGISTICS MANAGEMENT GROUP INC.

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner Attorneys

CHA ALEX ESQ.

CHA ALEX MYUNG

ADAMS THOMAS GREGORY

Defendant Attorneys

WU SAM X.J. ESQ.

WU SAM XIONG-JIE

 

Court Documents

Proof of Service by Substituted Service

10/7/2020: Proof of Service by Substituted Service

Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR (STATUS CONFERENCE; ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: DEFENDANTS' X-SPEE...) OF 09/21/2020

9/21/2020: Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR (STATUS CONFERENCE; ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: DEFENDANTS' X-SPEE...) OF 09/21/2020

Substitution of Attorney

4/29/2020: Substitution of Attorney

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (COURT ORDER)

3/25/2020: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (COURT ORDER)

Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR (COURT ORDER) OF 03/25/2020

3/25/2020: Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR (COURT ORDER) OF 03/25/2020

Amendment to Complaint (Fictitious/Incorrect Name) - AMENDMENT TO COMPLAINT (FICTITIOUS/INCORRECT NAME) DOE 2 JOHN C. KIM

3/30/2020: Amendment to Complaint (Fictitious/Incorrect Name) - AMENDMENT TO COMPLAINT (FICTITIOUS/INCORRECT NAME) DOE 2 JOHN C. KIM

Amendment to Complaint (Fictitious/Incorrect Name) - AMENDMENT TO COMPLAINT (FICTITIOUS/INCORRECT NAME) DOE 4 PAUL H. JUN

3/30/2020: Amendment to Complaint (Fictitious/Incorrect Name) - AMENDMENT TO COMPLAINT (FICTITIOUS/INCORRECT NAME) DOE 4 PAUL H. JUN

Order - ORDER TENTATIVE RULING

1/13/2020: Order - ORDER TENTATIVE RULING

Notice - NOTICE NOTICE OF RULING AND NOTICE OF CONTINUED CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

1/13/2020: Notice - NOTICE NOTICE OF RULING AND NOTICE OF CONTINUED CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

Order - ORDER [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT X-SPEED TRANSPORTATION'S MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER ADEQUATE RESPONSES FROM PLAINTIFF TO DEFENDANT X-SPEED TRANSPORTATION'S FORM INTERROGATORIES, SET ON

1/14/2020: Order - ORDER [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT X-SPEED TRANSPORTATION'S MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER ADEQUATE RESPONSES FROM PLAINTIFF TO DEFENDANT X-SPEED TRANSPORTATION'S FORM INTERROGATORIES, SET ON

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (STATUS CONFERENCE)

11/18/2019: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (STATUS CONFERENCE)

Declaration - DECLARATION DECLARATION OF RONALD Z. GOMEZ IN SUPPORT OF NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER ADEQUATE RESPONSES TO DEFENDANT X-SPEED'S FORM INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE; EXHIBITS 1

10/28/2019: Declaration - DECLARATION DECLARATION OF RONALD Z. GOMEZ IN SUPPORT OF NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER ADEQUATE RESPONSES TO DEFENDANT X-SPEED'S FORM INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE; EXHIBITS 1

Motion to Compel - MOTION TO COMPEL DEFENDANT X-SPEED TRANSPORTATION'S NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER ADEQUATE RESPONSES FROM PLAINTIFF JOHN CHOE TO X-SPEED TRANSPORTATION'S FORM INTERR

10/28/2019: Motion to Compel - MOTION TO COMPEL DEFENDANT X-SPEED TRANSPORTATION'S NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER ADEQUATE RESPONSES FROM PLAINTIFF JOHN CHOE TO X-SPEED TRANSPORTATION'S FORM INTERR

Declaration - DECLARATION DECLARATION OF RONALD Z. GOMEZ IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO COMPEL PLAINTIFF JOHN CHOE'S FURTHER ADEQUATE RESPONSES TO DEFENDANT X-SPEED TRANSPORTATION'S REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF

10/28/2019: Declaration - DECLARATION DECLARATION OF RONALD Z. GOMEZ IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO COMPEL PLAINTIFF JOHN CHOE'S FURTHER ADEQUATE RESPONSES TO DEFENDANT X-SPEED TRANSPORTATION'S REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF

Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR (COURT ORDER RE REASSIGNMENT OF NON-PERSONAL INJURY CASE TO AN...) OF 10/02/2019

10/2/2019: Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR (COURT ORDER RE REASSIGNMENT OF NON-PERSONAL INJURY CASE TO AN...) OF 10/02/2019

Notice of Status Conference and Order

10/4/2019: Notice of Status Conference and Order

[Proposed Order] and Stipulation to Continue Trial, FSC (and Related Motion/Discovery Dates) Person - [PROPOSED ORDER] AND STIPULATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL, FSC (AND RELATED MOTION/DISCOVERY DATES) PERSO

7/22/2019: [Proposed Order] and Stipulation to Continue Trial, FSC (and Related Motion/Discovery Dates) Person - [PROPOSED ORDER] AND STIPULATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL, FSC (AND RELATED MOTION/DISCOVERY DATES) PERSO

Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR (INFORMAL DISCOVERY CONFERENCE (IDC)) OF 09/24/2019

9/24/2019: Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR (INFORMAL DISCOVERY CONFERENCE (IDC)) OF 09/24/2019

34 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 12/17/2020
  • Hearing12/17/2020 at 08:30 AM in Department J at 400 Civic Center Plaza, Pomona, CA 91766; Order to Show Cause Re: Defendants' X-Speed Transportation's failure to Retain Counsel

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/17/2020
  • Hearing12/17/2020 at 08:30 AM in Department J at 400 Civic Center Plaza, Pomona, CA 91766; Status Conference

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/14/2020
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department J, Gloria White-Brown, Presiding; Order to Show Cause Re: (Defendants' X-Speed Transportation's failure to Retain Counsel) - Held - Continued

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/14/2020
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department J, Gloria White-Brown, Presiding; Status Conference - Held - Continued

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/14/2020
  • DocketMinute Order ( (Order to Show Cause Re: Defendants' X-Speed Transportation's ...)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/07/2020
  • DocketProof of Service by Substituted Service; Filed by John Choe (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/07/2020
  • DocketProof of Personal Service; Filed by John Choe (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/07/2020
  • DocketProof of Service by Substituted Service; Filed by John Choe (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/07/2020
  • DocketProof of Personal Service; Filed by John Choe (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/21/2020
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department J, Gloria White-Brown, Presiding; Status Conference - Held - Continued

    Read MoreRead Less
66 More Docket Entries
  • 10/10/2018
  • DocketAnswer; Filed by X-Speed Transportation, Inc. (Doe 1) (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/24/2018
  • DocketDECLARATION OF RONALD Z. GOMEZ, PURSUANT TO CCP 430.41(2); EXHIBIT 1

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/24/2018
  • DocketDeclaration; Filed by X-Speed Transportation, Inc. (Doe 1) (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/17/2018
  • DocketNOTICE OF CHANGE OF ADDRESS OR OTHER CONTACT INFORMATION

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/17/2018
  • DocketNotice of Change of Address or Other Contact Information; Filed by John Choe (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/15/2018
  • DocketAMENDMENT TO COMPLAINT

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/15/2018
  • DocketAmendment to Complaint; Filed by John Choe (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/11/2018
  • DocketSUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/11/2018
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by John Choe (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/11/2018
  • DocketCOMPLALNT 1. PRESUMED NEGLIGENCE (FAILURE TO CARRY WORKERS' COMPENSATION INSURANCE [CAL. LABOR CODE 3706]); ETC

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC701556    Hearing Date: January 13, 2020    Dept: J

HEARING DATE: Monday, January 13, 2020

NOTICE: Motions #1-#5: OK

RE: Choe v. American Eagle Transportation Corp. (BC701556)

______________________________________________________________________________

 

1. Defendant X-Speed Transportation’s MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER ADEQUATE RESPONSES FROM PLAINTIFF JOHN CHOE TO X-SPEED TRANSPORTATION’S FORM INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE

Responding Party: None (unopposed, as of 1/8/20, 2:18 p.m.; due 12/30/19)

2. Defendant X-Speed Transportation’s MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER ADEQUATE RESPONSES FROM PLAINTIFF JOHN CHOE TO X-SPEED TRANSPORTATION’S SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE

Responding Party: None (unopposed, as of 1/8/20, 2:18 p.m.; due 12/30/19)

3. Defendant X-Speed Transportation’s MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER ADEQUATE RESPONSES FROM PLAINTIFF JOHN CHOE TO X-SPEED TRANSPORTATION’S REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS AND THINGS, SET ONE

Responding Party: None (unopposed, as of 1/8/20, 2:18 p.m.; due 12/30/19)

4. Defendant X-Speed Transportation’s MOTION TO COMPEL JOHN CHOE’S RESPONSES TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET TWO

Responding Party: None (unopposed, as of 1/8/20, 2:18 p.m.; due 12/30/19)

5. Defendant X-Speed Transportation’s MOTION TO COMPEL JOHN CHOE’S RESPONSES TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS AND THINGS, SET TWO

Responding Party: None (unopposed, as of 1/8/20, 2:18 p.m.; due 12/30/19)

Tentative Ruling

1. Defendant X-Speed Transportation’s Motion to Compel Further Adequate Responses from Plaintiff John Choe to X-Speed Transportation’s Form Interrogatories, Set One is GRANTED. Plaintiff is ordered to serve further responses within 20 days. Sanctions are awarded in the reduced amount of $737.50, jointly and severally, and payable within 30 days.

2. Defendant X-Speed Transportation’s Motion to Compel Further Adequate Responses from Plaintiff John Choe to X-Speed Transportation’s Special Interrogatories, Set One is GRANTED. Plaintiff is ordered to serve further responses within 20 days. Sanctions are awarded in the reduced amount of $1,032.50, jointly and severally, and payable within 30 days.

3. Defendant X-Speed Transportation’s Motion to Compel Further Adequate Responses from John Choe to X-Speed Transportation’s Request for Production of Documents and Things, Set One is DENIED.

4. Defendant X-Speed Transportation’s Motion to Compel John Choe’s Responses to

Special Interrogatories, Set Two is GRANTED. Plaintiff is ordered to serve on X-Speed

verified responses, without objections, to X-Speed’s Special Interrogatories, Set One within

20 days. Sanctions are awarded in the reduced amount of $442.50, jointly and severally,

and payable within 30 days.

5. Defendant X-Speed Transportation’s Motion to Compel John Choe’s Responses to

Request for Production of Documents and Things, Set Two is GRANTED. Plaintiff is

ordered to serve on X-Speed verified responses, without objections, to Plaintiff’s Requests

for Production of Documents and Things, Set Two within 20 days. Sanctions are awarded

in the reduced amount of $442.50, jointly and severally, and payable within 30 days.

Background

Plaintiff John Choe (“Plaintiff”) alleges that he worked continuously for Defendants until he was injured in an on-the-job truck rollover crash in April 2017. Plaintiff alleges that Defendants misclassified him as an independent contractor and failed to provide or pay for meal and/or rest periods and failed to pay him minimum and overtime wages. Plaintiff alleges that Defendants also failed to timely pay him his wages upon termination, failed to appropriately reimburse/indemnify him for Defendants’ business expenses and failed to keep adequate records. Plaintiff alleges that Defendants also negligently operated their business and failed to carry worker’s compensation insurance, such that Plaintiff was and has been unable to obtain adequate medical care.

On April 11, 2018, Plaintiff filed a complaint, asserting causes of action against American Eagle Transportation Corp. (“AET”) and Does 1-50 for:

  1. Presumed Negligence (Failure to Carry Workers’ Compensation Insurance [Cal. Labor Code § 3706]

  2. Negligence

  3. Negligent Provision of Required Safeguards and Precautions

  4. Negligent Performance of an Undertaking

  5. Negligent Act of Third Party

  6. Failure to Provide Accurate Wage Statements (Cal. Labor Code § 226)

  7. Failure to Provide Employment Records (Cal. Labor Code § 226 et seq. and § 432)

  8. Failure to Provide Personnel Records (Cal. Labor Code §§ 1198.5 and 432)

  9. Failure to Provide Meal Periods (Cal. Labor Code §§ 226.7, 512 and 1199)

  10. Failure to Provide Rest Periods (Cal. Labor Code § 226.7)

  11. Unlawful Collection of, and Deductions from, Employees’ Wages (Cal. Labor Code § 221)

  12. Failure to Keep and Maintain Records (Cal. Labor Code § 1198.5(c))

  13. Failure to Pay All Wages Twice Each Month (Cal. Labor Code §§ 204, 210)

  14. Failure to Pay Earned Wages Upon Termination of Employment (Cal. Labor Code §§ 201-203, 208)

  15. Failure to Indemnify Employees (Cal. Labor Code § 2802)

  16. Failure to Pay Minimum Wages (Cal. Labor Code §§ 1194, 1194.2, 1197)

  17. Failure to Pay Minimum Wages (FLSA § 206)

  18. Failure to Provide Sick Leave/Paid Time Off (Cal. Labor Code § 246)

  19. Unlawful Business Practices (Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200 et seq.)

On June 15, 2018, Plaintiff filed an Amendment to Complaint, wherein X-Speed Transportation, Inc. (“X-Speed”) was named in lieu of Doe 1.

On October 2, 2019, Department 1 reassigned the case to the instant department for all purposes. A Status Conference is set for January 13, 2020.

1. Motion to Compel Furthers Re: Form Interrogatories, Set One

Legal Standard

A party may move to compel further responses to interrogatories if the propounding party deems that (1) an answer to a particular interrogatory is evasive or incomplete, (2) an exercise of the option to produce documents under Section 2030.230 is unwarranted or the required specification of those documents is inadequate, or (3) an objection to an interrogatory is without merit or too general. (CCP § 2030.300(a).)

A party may move to compel further responses to requests for admission if the propounding party deems that (1) an answer to a particular request is evasive or incomplete, or (2) an objection to a particular request is without merit or too general. (CCP § 2033.290(a).)

The moving party must demonstrate a “reasonable and good faith attempt” at an informal resolution of each issue presented. (CCP §§ 2016.040, 2030.300(b).)

Notice of the motion must be provided within 45 days of service of the verified response, or any supplemental verified response, or on or before any specific later date to which the parties have agreed in writing. (CCP § 2030.300(c).) The responding party has the burden of justifying the objections to the requests. (Coy v. Superior Court (1962) 58 Cal.2d 210, 220-221.)

Motions to compel further responses must always be accompanied by a separate statement containing the requests and the responses, verbatim, as well as reasons why a further response is warranted. (California Rules of Court [“CRC”] Rule 3.1345(a).) The separate statement must also be complete in itself; no extrinsic materials may be incorporated by reference. (CRC Rule 3.1345(c).)

The court shall impose a monetary sanction against any party, person, or attorney who unsuccessfully makes or opposes a motion to compel further responses to interrogatories or requests for admissions, unless it finds that the one subject to the sanction acted with substantial justification or that other circumstances make it unjust to impose sanctions. (CCP §§ 2030.300(d), 2033.290(d).)

Discussion

X-Speed moves the court for an order compelling Plaintiff to provide further responses to X-

Speed’s Form Interrogatories--General, Set One, Nos. 1.1, 8.4, 8.7, 12.1, 12.4, 12.7 and 20.2. X-

Speed also seeks monetary sanctions in the amount of $2,360.00 against Plaintiff and/or Tom

Adams Esq. (“Adams”) and/or J. Edward Kim Esq. (“Kim”).

On or about January 7, 2019, X-Speed served the subject discovery. (Gomez Decl., ¶2, Exh. 1.) After receiving extensions, Plaintiff served his responses thereto on March 28, 2019. (Id., ¶3, Exh. 2.) X-Speed’s counsel Ronald Gomez (“Gomez”) thereafter requested, and was granted, An extension to June 13, 2019 within which to prepare and provide a meet and confer letter and/or to file any needed motion to compel furthers. (Id., ¶¶3-4, Exh. 3.) On May 2, 2019, Gomez sent a meet and confer letter to Plaintiff’s counsel, requesting further responses on or before May 12, 2019. (Id., ¶6, Exh. 4.) Counsel subsequently agreed that Plaintiff could have until May 22, 2019 to provide further responses and that, in turn, X-Speed would have until June 23, 2019 to file any needed motion. (Id., ¶¶4 and 7, Exh. 3.) Counsel thereafter agreed that that Plaintiff could provide further responses by June 14, 2019, and that X-Speed would likewise receive additional time to file any needed motion. (Id., ¶¶4 and 8-10, Exh. 3.)

Plaintiff’s counsel failed to provide further responses on June 14, 2019, which prompted Gomez to obtain an Informal Discovery Conference (“IDC”) date of July 9, 2019 and hearing dates of January 8, 9 and 10, 2020 for the motions to compel through Department 4A of the personal injury hub. At the time, trial in this case was set for October 11, 2019, so the parties stipulated to continue the trial date to February 11, 2020 and to move the IDC to September 24, 2019. (Id., ¶11, Exh. 5.) On September 24, 2019, Department 4A called and advised that the IDC was being taken off calendar because the case was being referred to Department 1 for review and reassignment. (Id., ¶12, Exh. 6.) The matter was reassigned to this court on or about October 2, 2019. (Id., ¶12, Exh. 7.) The motion was filed on October 28, 2019. The motion appears to be timely filed and is unopposed.

The court has reviewed the interrogatories. A further response to No. 1.1 is warranted, inasmuch as Plaintiff failed to include the name of any natural persons who assisted in the preparation of the responses. Further responses to Nos. 8.4 and 8.7 are warranted, inasmuch as Plaintiff failed to explain how the respective amounts were calculated. A further response to No. 12.1 is warranted, as Plaintiff failed to set forth Jongmok Jang’s address and telephone number as requested. A further response to No. 12.4(a) is warranted, as Plaintiff failed to identify the number of photographs of which Plaintiff is aware. A further response to No. 12.7 is warranted, as Plaintiff’s response, “[u]nknown,” to the query “[h]ave you or anyone acting on your behalf inspected the scene of the incident” is plainly inadequate. A further response to No. 20.2 is warranted, as Plaintiff has failed to respond to each of the subparts. The motion, then, is GRANTED in its entirety. Plaintiff is ordered to serve further responses within 20 days.

Sanctions

X-Speed seeks sanctions in the amount of $2,360.00 [calculated as follows: 8 hours preparing motion, plus 3 hours attending hearing at $295.00/hour].

The court determines that the amount of sanctions requested are excessive. Sanctions are awarded in the reduced amount of $1,032.50 (i.e., 3 hours preparing motion, plus 0.5 hours appearance time at $295.00/hour). Sanctions are payable within 30 days.

2. Motion to Compel Furthers Re: Special Interrogatories, Set One

Legal Standard

See Motion #1 above.

Discussion

X-Speed moves the court for an order compelling Plaintiff to provide further responses to X-

Speed’s Special Interrogatories, Set One, Nos. 13, 14 and 16-85. X-Speed also seeks monetary

sanctions in the amount of $3,245.00 against Plaintiff and/or Adams and/or Kim.

See synopsis of Motion #1.

The court has reviewed the interrogatories. Further responses are warranted. Plaintiff has failed to oppose the motion and thus has not met its burden of justifying its objections. Moreover, contention interrogatories are recognized by CCP § 2030.010(b) (i.e., “[a]n interrogatory may relate to whether another party is making a certain contention, or to the facts, witnesses, and writings on which a contention is based. An interrogatory is not objectionable because an answer to it involves an opinion or contention that relates to fact or the application of law to fact, or would be based on information obtained or legal theories developed in anticipation of litigation or in preparation for trial”). The motion, then, is GRANTED in its entirety. Plaintiff is ordered to serve further responses within 20 days.

Sanctions

X-Speed seeks sanctions in the amount of $2,360.00 [calculated as follows: 5 hours preparing motion, plus 3 hours attending hearing at $295.00/hour].

The court determines that the amount of sanctions requested are excessive. Sanctions are awarded in the reduced amount of $737.50 (i.e., 2 hours preparing motion, plus 0.5 hours appearance time at $295.00/hour). Sanctions are payable within 30 days.

3. Motion to Compel Furthers Re: Request for Production of Documents and Things, Set One

Legal Standard

A party to whom a demand for inspection or production of documents has been brought must respond to each item by any of the following: (1) A statement that the party will comply with the particular demand. (2) A representation that the party lacks the ability to comply with the demand. (3) An objection to the particular demand. (CCP § 2031.210(a).) A statement that the party to whom a demand for inspection or production of documents has been directed will comply with the particular demand shall state that the inspection or production will be allowed either in whole or in part, and that all documents or things in the demanded category that are in the possession, custody, or control of that party and to which no objection is being made will be included in the production. (CCP § 2031.220.)

A motion to compel further responses to a demand for inspection or production of documents may be brought based on: (1) incomplete statements of compliance; (2) inadequate, evasive or incomplete representations of inability to comply; or (3) unmerited or overly generalized objections. (CCP § 2031.310(a).) The moving party must demonstrate a “reasonable and good faith attempt” at an informal resolution of each issue presented. (CCP §§ 2016.040, 2031.310(b)(2).)

A motion to compel further responses to a demand for inspection or production of documents must set forth specific facts showing “good cause” justifying the discovery sought by the demand. (CCP 2031.310(b)(2).) If the moving party has shown good cause for the production of documents, the burden is on the objecting party to justify the objections. (Kirkland v. Superior Court (2002) 95 Cal.App.4th 92, 98.)

Notice of the motion must be provided within 45 days of service of the verified response, or any supplemental verified response, or on or before any specific later date to which the parties have agreed in writing. (CCP § 2030.310(c).)

Motions to compel further responses must always be accompanied by a separate statement containing the requests and the responses, verbatim, as well as reasons why a further response is warranted. (CRC Rule 3.1345(a).) The separate statement must also be complete in itself; no extrinsic materials may be incorporated by reference. (CRC Rule 3.1345(c).)

The court shall impose a monetary sanction against any party, person, or attorney who unsuccessfully makes or opposes a motion to compel further responses to a demand for inspection or production of documents, unless it finds that the one subject to the sanction acted with substantial justification or that other circumstances make it unjust to impose sanctions. (CCP § 2031.310(h).)

Discussion

X-Speed moves the court for an order compelling Plaintiff to provide further responses to X-

Speed’s Request for Production of Documents and Things, Set One, Nos. 6, 10, 14, 16, 17, 20,

21 and 24. X-Speed also seeks monetary sanctions in the amount of $1,770.00 against Plaintiff

and/or Adams and/or Kim.

See synopsis of Motion #1.

The motion is DENIED. X-Speed has failed to set forth specific facts showing “good cause”

justifying the discovery sought, as per CCP § 2031.310(b)(2).

4. Motion to Compel Re: Special Interrogatories, Set Two

Legal Standard

A response to interrogatories is due 30 days after service. (CCP § 2030.260(a).) If a party to

whom the interrogatories are directed fails to serve a timely response to it, the party propounding

the interrogatories may move for an order compelling response to the interrogatories. (CCP §

2030.290(b).) The court shall impose a monetary sanction against any party, person, or attorney

who unsuccessfully makes or opposes such a motion to compel, unless it finds that the one

subject to the sanction acted with substantial justification or that other circumstances make the

imposition of the sanction unjust.” (CCP § 2030.290(c).)

Discussion

X-Speed moves the court for an order compelling Plaintiff to provide responses to X-Speed’s

Special Interrogatories, Set Two. X-Speed also seeks monetary sanctions in the amount

of $1,475.00 against Plaintiff and/or Adams and/or Kim

On August 21, 2019, X-Speed mail-served the subject discovery. (Gomez Decl., ¶4, Exh. A.) Plaintiff’s counsel requested, and X-Speed’s counsel granted, a two-week extension to October 9, 2019 to respond to the subject discovery. (Id., ¶5.) Plaintiff did not request any further extensions and has failed to respond to the subject discovery. (Id., ¶¶5-6.)

The motion is GRANTED. Plaintiff is ordered to serve on X-Speed verified responses, without

objections, to X-Speed’s Special Interrogatories, Set Two within 20 days.

Sanctions

X-Speed seeks sanctions in the amount of $1,475.00 [calculated as follows: 2 hours reviewing file and preparing motion, plus 3 hours drafting reply brief and attending hearing at $295.00/hour].

The court determines that the amount of sanctions requested are excessive. Sanctions are awarded in the reduced amount of $442.50 (i.e., 1 hour preparing motion, plus 0.5 hours appearance time at $295.00/hour). Sanctions are payable within 30 days.

5. Motion to Compel Re: Request for Production of Documents and Things, Set Two

Legal Standard

A response to a request for production of documents is due 30 days after service. (CCP §

2031.260(a).) If a party to whom a request for production of documents is directed fails to serve

a timely response to it, the party making the demand may move for an order compelling response

to the demand. (CCP § 2031.300(b).) The court shall impose a monetary sanction against any

party, person, or attorney who unsuccessfully makes or opposes such a motion to compel, unless

it finds that the one subject to the sanction acted with substantial justification or that other

circumstances make the imposition of the sanction unjust.” (CCP § 2031.300(c).)

Discussion

X-Speed moves the court for an order compelling Plaintiff to provide responses to X-Speed’s

Request for Production of Documents and Things, Set Two. X-Speed also seeks monetary

sanctions in the amount of $1,475.00 against Plaintiff and/or Adams and/or Kim.

See synopsis of Motion #4.

The motion is GRANTED. Plaintiff is ordered to serve on X-Speed verified responses, without

objections, to X-Speed’s Request for Production of Documents and Things, Set Two within 20

days.

Sanctions

X-Speed seeks sanctions in the amount of $1,475.00 [calculated as follows: 2 hours reviewing file and preparing motion, plus 3 hours drafting reply brief and attending hearing at $295.00/hour].

The court determines that the amount of sanctions requested are excessive. Sanctions are awarded in the reduced amount of $442.50 (i.e., 1 hour preparing motion, plus 0.5 hours appearance time at $295.00/hour). Sanctions are payable within 30 days.