Motion for Order that Matters in Requests for Admission of Truth of Facts be Deemed Admitted
CASE NUMBER: 25CVG-01191 Tentative Ruling on Motion for Order that Matters in Requests for Admission of Truth of Facts be Deemed Admitted: Plaintiff JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. seeks an order deeming the truth of the matters specified in Plaintiff’s Requests for Admission, Set One to be admitted by Defendant Aleta N. Severe. Despite being timely notice with the motion, Defendant not file an Opposition.
When a party fails to respond to Requests for Admission, the requesting party may move for an order deeming the genuineness of documents and the truth of matters specified in the requests admitted. CCP § 2033.280(b). Failure to respond also waives any objections to the discovery propounded. CCP § 2033.280(a). Plaintiff’s moving papers sufficiently demonstrate that Defendant has failed to respond to Request for Admissions, Set One within the required time frame. Unlike a motion to compel further responses, a motion to compel responses when no responses have been provided does not require the propounding party to demonstrate good cause or that it satisfied a meet-and-confer requirement. Sinaiko Healthcare Consulting, Inc. v. Pacific Healthcare Consultants (2007) 148 Cal. App. 4th 390.
Monetary sanctions are mandatory per CCP § 2033.280(c), however, Plaintiff did not seek monetary sanctions and provided no evidence regarding attorney’s fees or other costs associated with bringing the motion. Sanctions should only be imposed for “reasonable” expenses. CCP § 2023.030. The Court does not have information upon which to make a finding that any amount of sanctions were for reasonable expenses and will not impose sanctions.
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?”
The motion is GRANTED. Defendant is deemed to have admitted as true each of the items contained in Plaintiff’s Request for Admissions, Set One. Objections are waived. Plaintiff provided a proposed Order, however, it was stapled to the moving papers and cannot be detached. Plaintiff will need to submit a proposed Order for execution. The trial date of August 17, 2026 is confirmed.
KUHN, ET AL. VS. DIGNITY HEALTH, ET AL.