Motion to Compel Initial Responses; Motion to Compel Further Responses; Request for Monetary Sanctions
23CV009868: HIMLEY vs SAMAAN 06/06/2024 Hearing on Motion to Compel Responses to Request for Production of Documents in Department 54
Tentative Ruling
Defendant Nabil Samaans (Defendant) motion to compel Plaintiff in pro per Dirk Himley (Plaintiff) to serve responses to Defendants Request for Production of Documents, Set One is ruled upon as follows.
The Notice of Motion provides the incorrect address for the Court. The correct address for Department 54 of the Sacramento County Superior Court is 813 6th Street, Sacramento, California 95814.
Defendant served the subject discovery on Plaintiff via mail on January 28, 2024. (Obregon Decl., ¶ 2. Exh. A.) Plaintiff failed to timely serve responses. (Obregon Decl., ¶ 3.) On March 10, 2024, Defendants counsel sent Plaintiff an email notifying him that the deadline to serve responses had passed. Defendants counsel further stated, Please provide responses without objections to all of Defendants Request for Production of Documents, Set One by end of day Friday 3/15/2024. Your failure to do so will force me to file a motion to compel and request sanctions for my time to draft and file said motion. (Obregon Decl., Exh. B, p. 1.) Defendants counsel sent a second email on March 11, 2024 that again requested Plaintiff to serve responses without objections by March 15, 2024. (Obregon Decl., Exh. B, p. 2.)
On March 14, 2024, Plaintiff served responses to Defendants Request for Production of Documents. The responses included objections. (Obregon Decl., Exh. C.)
The exact nature of Defendants motion is difficult to decipher. Defendants notice of motion indicates that he is seeking an order compelling Plaintiff Dirk Himley, to serve on a response to the Defendants Request for Production of Documents, Set One which he served on Defendant on January 28, 2024, and will further move this court for an order requiring Plaintiff to pay a monetary sanction to Defendant. (Notice of Motion, pp. 1:26-2:1.) The notice of motion does not identify the statute under which Defendant brings this motion. Defendants memorandum refers Code of Civil Procedure sections 2031.300 (motion to compel initial responses) and 2031.310 (motion to compel further responses). These are two distinct types of motions and cannot be combined in the manner Defendant seemingly attempts to do.
The Court construes this motion as solely a motion to compel initial responses under Code of Civil Procedure section 2031.300. While Defendant at times argues that Plaintiffs responses are substantively deficient, Defendant has failed to comply with at least two requirements related to a motion to compel further responses. First, such motions require a meet and confer declaration. (
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”
23CV009868: HIMLEY vs SAMAAN 06/06/2024 Hearing on Motion to Compel Responses to Request for Production of Documents in Department 54
3.1345(a).) Defendant has submitted an exhibit described as an exhaustive list of deficiencies with Plaintiffs responses to Defendants Request for Document Production, Set One. (Obregon Decl., ¶ 9, Exh. D.) This document is not a separate statement as it does not comply with California Rules of Court rule 3.1345(c). Further, the Court has not granted Defendant leave to file a concise outline of the discovery request and each response in dispute in lieu of a separate statement, and it does not appear Exhibit D would qualify as a concise outline. (Code Civ. Proc. § 2031.310(b)(3).)
Accordingly, to the extent Defendant moves to compel further responses, the motion is DENIED. However, Defendant has established that Plaintiff failed to timely serve responses. Plaintiffs belated responses include objections which have been waived due to Plaintiffs failure to serve timely responses. (See Code Civ. Proc. § 2031.300(a).) Plaintiffs contention that Defendant extended the deadline to respond to March 15, 2024 is rejected, as it is not supported by the email from Defendants counsel in which he requests Plaintiff serve responses without objections by March 15, 2024. Therefore, Defendants motion to compel Plaintiffs initial responses is GRANTED.
Defendants request for monetary sanctions is DENIED. The Court finds that the imposition of sanctions against Plaintiff would be unjust under the circumstances.
Plaintiff shall serve responses to Defendants Request for Production of Documents, Set One, without objections, by no later than June 20, 2024.
This minute order is effective immediately. No formal order or other notice is required. (Code Civ. Proc. § 1019.5; Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1312.)
NOTICE:
Consistent with Local Rule 1.06(B), any party requesting oral argument on any matter on this calendar must comply with the following procedure:
To request limited oral argument, on any matter on this calendar, you must call the Law and Motion Oral Argument Request Line at (916) 874-2615 by 4:00 p.m. the Court day before the hearing and advise opposing counsel. At the time of requesting oral argument, the requesting party shall leave a voice mail message: a) identifying themselves as the party requesting oral argument; b) indicating the specific matter/motion for which they are requesting oral argument; and c) confirming that it has notified the opposing party of its intention to appear and that opposing party may appear via Zoom using the Zoom link and Meeting ID indicated below. If no request for oral argument is made, the tentative ruling becomes the final order of the Court.
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO
23CV009868: HIMLEY vs SAMAAN 06/06/2024 Hearing on Motion to Compel Responses to Request for Production of Documents in Department 54
Unless ordered to appear in person by the Court, parties may appear remotely either telephonically or by video conference via the Zoom video/audio conference platform with notice to the Court and all other parties in accordance with Code of Civil Procedure §367.75. Although remote participation is not required, the Court will presume all parties are appearing remotely for non-evidentiary civil hearings. The Department 53/54 Zoom Link is https://saccourt-cagov.zoomgov.com/my/sscdept53.54 and the Zoom Meeting ID is 161 4650 6749. To appear on Zoom telephonically, call (833) 568-8864 and enter the Zoom Meeting ID referenced above. NO COURTCALL APPEARANCES WILL BE ACCEPTED.
Parties requesting services of a court reporter will need to arrange for private court reporter services at their own expense, pursuant to Government code §68086 and California Rules of Court, Rule 2.956. Requirements for requesting a court reporter are listed in the Policy for Official Reporter Pro Tempore available on the Sacramento Superior Court website at https://www.saccourt.ca.gov/court-reporters/docs/crtrp-6a.pdf. Parties may contact Court- Approved Official Reporters Pro Tempore by utilizing the list of Court Approved Official Reporters Pro Tempore available at https://www.saccourt.ca.gov/court-reporters/docs/crtrp- 13.pdf.
A Stipulation and Appointment of Official Reporter Pro Tempore (CV/E-206) is required to be signed by each party, the private court reporter, and the Judge prior to the hearing, if not using a reporter from the Courts Approved Official Reporter Pro Tempore list.
Once the form is signed it must be filed with the clerk. If a litigant has been granted a fee waiver and requests a court reporter, the party must submit a Request for Court Reporter by a Party with a Fee Waiver (CV/E-211) and it must be filed with the clerk at least 10 days prior to the hearing or at the time the proceeding is scheduled if less than 10 days away. Once approved, the clerk will forward the form to the Court Reporters Office and an official reporter will be provided.