JUDITH MALDONADO VS. GERARDO ORNELAS, ET AL.

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: ****7715 Hearing Date: October 22, 2021 Dept: F47

Dept. F-47

Date: 10/22/21

Case #****7715

MOTION TO COMPEL

(Special Interrogatories, Set 1)

Motion filed on 5/13/21.

MOVING PARTY: Defendant Celia Ornelas Cash

RESPONDING PARTY: Plaintiff Judith Maldonado

NOTICE: ok

RELIEF REQUESTED: An order compelling Plaintiff to provide verified responses, without objections, to Defendant Celia Ornelas Cash’s Special Interrogatories, Set 1. Additionally, Defendant requests that Plaintiff pay sanctions in the amount of, at least, $2,536.65 (increased to $3,976.65 in the reply).

RULING: The motion is granted. Responses without objections are due within 20 days. Sanctions in the amount of $1,500.00 are imposed against Plaintiff payable within 20 days.

On 1/5/21, Defendant Celia Ornelas Cash (Cash) served Plaintiff with Special Interrogatories, Set 1, by mail making responses due by 2/9/21. (Wake Decl. ¶2, Ex.1). Plaintiff failed to serve timely responses. (Wake Decl. ¶3). Despite meet and confer efforts with Plaintiff, while she was representing herself, and later with Plaintiff’s current counsel, Plaintiff failed to serve responses before the instant motion was filed and served on 5/13/21. (Wake Decl. ¶¶4-5, Ex.2).

On 5/13/21, Cash filed and served the instant motion seeking an order compelling Plaintiff to provide verified responses, without objections, to Cash’s Special Interrogatories, Set 1. Additionally, Cash requests that Plaintiff pay sanctions in the amount of, at least, $2,536.65 (increased to $3,976.65 in the reply). An opposition to the motion was due to be filed and served on or before 10/8/21 (9 court days before the 10/22/21 hearing date). CCP 1005(b). On 10/15/21, Plaintiff served, by email, and filed a late opposition to the motion. On the same date, Cash filed and served a reply wherein Cash’s counsel indicates that he never agreed to accept service by email as required by CCP 1010.6(a)(2)(A)(i).

Both the opposition and reply indicate that Plaintiff served responses on 6/3/21. (Wake Decl. ¶9; Opp., Ex.A verification signed 10/14/21). However, those responses were not verified making them the equivalent to no response at all. Id.; See Appleton (1988) 206 CA3d 632, 636. Additionally, contrary to the assertion in the reply that Plaintiff served responses without objections, the responses begin with “General Answers and Objections.” (emphasis added) (See Opp., Ex.A, p.1:27-p.2:15). Since Plaintiff did not serve verified responses until 10/15/21, well after the instant motion was filed and served, the Court may still rule on the instant motion. See Sinaiko Healthcare Consulting, Inc. (2007) 148 CA4th 390, 407.

As such, Plaintiff is ordered to provide verified responses, without objections, to Cash’s Special Interrogatories, Set 1, within 20 days. Additionally, since Cash was required to file and serve the instant motion in order to obtain such responses, Cash is entitled to an award of sanctions against Plaintiff. CCP 2030.290(c); CRC 3.1348(a). Based on the foregoing, sanctions are imposed against Plaintiff in the amount of $1,500.00, payable within 20 days.

The Court further notes that Plaintiff has failed to comply with the “Technical Requirements” set forth in the 5/3/19 First Amended General Order Re Mandatory Electronic Filing for Civil in that Plaintiff has failed to bookmark the declaration and exhibit attached to the opposition. (5/3/19 First Amended General Order Re Mandatory Electronic Filing for Civil, p.4:4-p.5:12) See also CRC 3.1110(f)(4). Failure to comply with these requirements in the future may result in matters being placed off calendar, matters being continued so documents can be resubmitted in compliance with these requirements, documents not being considered and/or the imposition of sanctions.

Additionally, the declaration of Plaintiff’s counsel is not executed in compliance with CCP 2015.5. Further, the opposition contends that Plaintiff has limited knowledge of the English language, but it gives no indication that the discovery responses, which are in English, were translated to Plaintiff in another language. (Panossian-Bassler Decl. ¶¶2, 4). Nor does the opposition explain how Plaintiff filed/drafted the Complaint in this action in English, while representing herself, if she has limited knowledge of the English language.

Case Number: ****7715    Hearing Date: May 5, 2021    Dept: F47

Dept. F-47

Date: 5/5/21 TRIAL DATE: 1/24/22

Case #****7715

MOTION TO COMPEL

Motion filed on 3/8/21.

MOVING PARTY: Defendant Celia Ornelas Cash

RESPONDING PARTY: Plaintiff Judith Maldonado

RELIEF REQUESTED: An order compelling Plaintiff to provide responses to Defendant Celia Ornelas’ Special Interrogatories served on 1/5/21. Additionally, Defendant requests sanctions against Plaintiff in the amount of $2,311.65.

RULING: The motion is placed off calendar.

At the time this motion was served on 3/8/21, Plaintiff was representing herself. The proof of service attached to the motion indicates that it was served on Plaintiff’s correct address by mail. The proof of service also indicates that a “courtesy copy” of the motion was mailed to attorney Natalie Panossian-Bassler. Attorney Panossian-Bassler filed a substitution of attorney formally substituting in as Plaintiff’s counsel on 3/17/21. The proof of service attached to the substitution of attorney indicates that it was served on defense counsel on 3/15/21. The zip code for attorney Panossian-Bassler in the proof of service for the motion is incorrect (93020 v. 93021).

The original hearing date for this motion was 8/16/21. (See Motion, p.1:15; Reservation Receipt attached to motion). If the hearing was proceeding on 8/16/21, the defect in the address for attorney Panossian-Bassler in the proof of service would be irrelevant as attorney Pannosian-Bassler was not Plaintiff’s counsel of record at the time the motion was served. However, pursuant to Defendant’s request at the 3/18/21 Status Conference, the hearing on the instant motion was advanced to 3/18/21 and continued to 5/5/21. (See 3/18/21 Minute Order). Defendant was ordered to give notice. Id. Defendant has failed to file evidence that she provided notice that the hearing on the motion was changed to 5/5/21 as ordered by the Court. No response to the motion has been filed by Plaintiff.

Based on the foregoing, the motion is placed off calendar due to Defendant’s failure to provide notice of the current hearing date.

Case Number: ****7715    Hearing Date: January 05, 2021    Dept: F47

Dept. F-47

Date: 1/5/21

Case #****7715

MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM FAILURE TO APPEAR/DEFAULT

Motion filed on 11/13/20.

MOVING PARTY: Defendants Celia Ornelas-Cash and Gerardo Ornelas

RESPONDING PARTY: Plaintiff Judith Maldonado

NOTICE: ok

RELIEF REQUESTED: An order relieving them from their failure to appear in this matter at the Trial Setting Conference on 8/13/20 and at the Order to Show Cause re: Sanctions on 9/15/20.

RULING: The unopposed motion is granted as set forth below.

On 9/15/20, the Answer to the Complaint filed by Defendant Celia Ornelas on 10/20/17 was stricken and her default was entered due to her failure to appear at the 8/13/20 Trial Setting Conference and Mandatory Settlement Conference and her failure to appear at the resulting 9/15/20 Order to Show Cause Re: Sanctions. (See 9/15/20 Minute Order). The Court noted that default had previously been entered against Defendant Gerardo Ornelas. Id.

On 11/30/20, this Court signed an order, pursuant to the stipulation of Plaintiff and Defendant Gerardo Ornelas signed on 7/22/19, that the default judgment entered against Gerardo Ornelas on 4/16/19 is vacated. (NOTE: Only default was entered against Gerardo Ornelas on 4/16/19, not default judgment.). The stipulation and order required Defendant Gerardo Ornelas to file his Answer to the Complaint within 20 days of entry of the stipulation as an order of the Court. (See 11/30/20 Stipulation & Order, p.2:8-9). Defendant Gerardo Ornelas has yet to separately file his Answer, copies of which are attached to the Stipulation and Order and this motion. Therefore, Defendant Gerardo Ornelas is ordered to immediately file his Answer to the Complaint.

Defendants’ attorney has submitted a declaration stating that the failure to appear on 8/13/20 and 9/15/20 was solely his fault. (See Wake Decl.). Based on the foregoing and the fact that the instant motion is made within six months of the entry of default against Defendant Celia Ornelas, relief is mandatory as to Defendant Celia Ornelas. CCP 473(b).