Tentative Ruling - Motion to Compel Further Responses to Special Interrogatories
Filed by: Maciora, Kenneth
On motion of the court, this matter is continued to 10/26/2018 at 09:00AM in this department. If the new date is inconvenient, then counsel shall meet and confer and, no later than 4:00PM today, inform the Department 54 Clerk of their request for a subsequent date.
Having reviewed the moving, opposing and reply papers, it is apparent to the court that counsel and/or parties in propria persona must resume the meet-and-confer process in good faith before drawing upon the court's limited resources.
Counsel and/or parties in propria persona are reminded that (1) a letter outlining deficiencies in discovery responses is often a useful way to commence the meet-and-confer process, (2) one party's failure to pay a monetary sanction is not grounds for the opposing party to disregard meet-and-confer requirements or other statutory commands, (3) counsel and/or parties in propria persona generally should not refuse to speak to one another by telephone and (4) neither telephonic nor written communications between counsel and/or parties in propria persona should be used to
harass or demean.
Counsel and/or parties in propria persona shall meet and confer in person or by telephone no later than 10/09/18. After thoroughly meeting and conferring in an attempt to resolve each and every issue that the motion currently encompasses, and no later than 10/19/18, counsel and/or parties in propria persona shall file a joint statement indicating which discovery issues have been resolved, and which issues (if any) remain outstanding. For each outstanding issue, counsel and/or parties in propria persona shall set forth in the joint statement their respective positions, citing the relevant facts and authorities. Boilerplate or cut-and-paste arguments are strongly discouraged.
Counsel and/or parties in propria persona are reminded that this court does not have the resources to tend to and resolve every discovery issue that could have and should have been resolved informally. (See Young v. Rosenthal (1989) 212 Cal.App.3d 96, 117 ["The very purpose of an order to meet and confer is to obtain a negotiated resolution of a discovery dispute without having to expend judicial time to sort out which party is correct and what relief should be granted. What the court seeks is an agreement by the parties which resolves the dispute"].)
Counsel are also reminded that this court has adopted, as part of its local rules, the California Attorney Guidelines of Civility and Professionalism, promulgated by the State Bar of California. In particular, the court refers counsel to Sections 4, 6, 9 and 10. The court is bound to impose monetary sanctions against any party who unsuccessfully makes or opposes a motion to compel further discovery responses, absent a substantial justification or other reason making the imposition of sanctions unjust. The court may also impose sanctions for the failure to meet and confer in good faith or otherwise misuse the discovery process. (See Cal. Code Civ. Proc. §§
2023.010-2023.030.)
The court will consider each side's meet-and-confer efforts in deciding whether to impose sanctions.
