BLY, ET AL. VS. MARQUIS CARE AT SHASTA, ET AL.

CASE NUMBER: 25CV-0209458 Tentative Ruling on Three Motions to Compel Discovery Responses: Plaintiffs Laura Bly, Julie Dowell, and David Eatchell, individually and as successors-in-interest to the Estate of Bettie Eatchel seek an order compelling Defendants’ responses to 1) Special Interrogatories, Set One, 2) Form Interrogatories, Set One, and 3) Requests for Production, Set One. Each set of discovery was served on April 1, 2026. No responses have been served. Defendants concede they have not served responses

A party has thirty days after service to respond to a Request for Production, Request for Admissions, Form Interrogatories, or Special Interrogatories. CCP §§ 2031.260(a), 2033.250(a), and 2030.260(a). Not providing a timely response to propounded discovery results in a waiver of objections. CCP §§ 2031.300(a). 2033.280(a), and 2030.290(a). If a party to whom a discovery request is directed fails to serve a timely response, the party propounding discovery may move for an order compelling a response. CCP §§ 2031.300(b) and 2030.290(c).

Plaintiff has provided evidence that Plaintiff propounded the three sets of discovery at issue by mail on April 1, 2026. Defendant’s Oppositions concede that responses were not timely served. Defendant argues that they will serve verified code compliant responses without objections prior to hearing on these Motions. There is no evidence before the Court that they have done so. Plaintiff did not request sanctions and did not provide evidence to support the Court’s determination of a reasonable amount. Therefore, no sanctions will be imposed.

Plaintiffs’ Motions to Compel responses to Special Interrogatories, Set One, Form Interrogatories, Set One, and Requests for Production, Set One are GRANTED. Proposed orders have been lodged and will be executed.

IN RE CHRISTIAN