Case Number: BC541477??? Hearing Date: June 14, 2016??? Dept: 37
CASE NAME: People ex re. Allstate Insurance Company, et al. v. Park, et al.
CASE NO.: BC541477
HEARING DATE: 6/14/16
DEPARTMENT: 37
CALENDAR NO.: 9
TRIAL DATE: 10/6/16
NOTICE: OK
SUBJECT: Motions to Deem Matters Admitted and Compel Discovery Responses
MOVING PARTY: People of the State of California ex rel. Allstate Insurance Company; Allstate Indemnity Company; Allstate Fire & Casualty Insurance Company; Allstate Property & Casualty Insurance Company; and Allstate Vehicle & Property Insurance Company
OPPOSING PARTY: None
COURT?S TENTATIVE RULING
The unopposed motions against Defendants Chang Hwan Park and Tiffany Wonjin Yang are granted, and a monetary sanction of $600 is awarded against each. Counsel for Plaintiff to give notice.
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
This action arises out of an alleged fraudulent scheme to defraud insurance companies. Plaintiff alleges that Defendants illegally owned and operated a number of sham law offices and health care practices for the purpose of fabricating insurance claims to deceive insurers into paying policy proceeds to personal injury patients. Plaintiff brings this action on behalf of the allegedly defrauded insurance companies. Before the court are five discovery motions brought by Plaintiff against Defendants (1) Chang Hwan Park, (2) Management Plus Group, (3) Tiffany Wonjin Yang, (4) Kinji Nicole Hithe Baker, and (5) Stephanie Park, respectively. This written discussion is directed to the unopposed motions directed at Chang Hwan Park and Tiffany Wonjin Yang. The remaining motions will be the subject of discussion at the hearing and the court will rule on those motions at that time.
DISCUSSION
I. Chang Hwan Park
Defendant Chang Hwan Park has failed to respond to Plaintiff?s request for admissions and special and form interrogatories. The result is that, with respect to the request for admission, Mr. Park has waived any objection to the request, and Plaintiff now seeks an order that the truth of the matters specified in the request be deemed admitted, as well as a monetary sanction. (Code Civ. Proc., ? 2033.280, subds. (a)-(b).)
?The court shall make this order, unless it finds that the party to whom the requests for admission have been directed has served, before the hearing on the motion, a proposed response to the requests for admission that is in substantial compliance with Section 2033.220. It is mandatory that the court impose a monetary sanction under Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 2023.010) on the party or attorney, or both, whose failure to serve a timely response to requests for admission necessitated this motion.? (Id. ? 2033.280, subd. (c).) Mr. Park does not oppose the motion against him, and he has not served a proposed response to the request for admission.
Similarly, with respect to the interrogatories, Mr. Park also has waived any objections, and Plaintiff now seeks an order compelling responses to the interrogatories. (Id. ?? 2030.260, subd. (a), 2030.290, subd. (b).) In the absence of a substantial justification for opposing the motion or other unjust circumstances, the court shall impose a monetary sanction against the party who unsuccessfully opposes a motion to compel a response to interrogatories. (Id. ? 2030.290, subd. (c).)
In sum, Mr. Park does not oppose the motion against him. Accordingly, Plaintiff?s motion is granted with respect to the order that the truth of the matters specified in the request for admissions be deemed admitted, and with respect to the order that Mr. Park respond to the special and form interrogatories. Although Plaintiff seeks a monetary sanction of $1,380, the court awards a monetary sanction of $600 against Mr. Park.
II. Tiffany Wonjin Yang
Tiffany Wonjin Yang has failed to respond to Plaintiff?s request for admissions, special and form interrogatories, and requests for production of documents. Ms. Yang does not oppose the motion against her. Accordingly, the truth of the matters specified in the request for admissions is deemed admitted (Code Civ. Proc., ? 2033.280, subd. (c)); Ms. Yang is ordered to respond to the special and form interrogatories (see id. ? 2030.290, subd. (b); and Ms. Yang is ordered to respond to the requests for production of documents (see id. ? 2031.300, subd. (b)). In addition, the court awards a monetary sanction. (Id. ?? 2030.290, subd. (c), 2031.300, subd. (c), 2033.280, subd. (c).) Although Plaintiff seeks a monetary sanction of $1,170, the court awards a monetary sanction of $600 against Ms. Yang.