How Requests for Admissions Under CCP § 2033.420 Can Pay Off
In California litigation, Code of Civil Procedure § 2033.420 offers a powerful tool: the “Cost of Proof” sanction. When a party unjustifiably denies a Request for Admission (RFA) and that matter is later proven true at trial, the requesting party may recover the reasonable expenses incurred in proving it—including attorneys’ fees.
How It Works
RFAs streamline trials by narrowing down uncontested facts. But when a party denies an RFA without substantial justification, and the opposing side is forced to prove that fact in court, CCP § 2033.420 kicks in. This statute allows courts to sanction the denying party for unnecessary litigation costs.
Case Law in Action
- In Grace v. Mansourian (2015) 240 Cal.App.4th 523, the defendant denied requests for admission during discovery regarding liability for running a red light. However, substantial trial evidence—including the plaintiff’s testimony, a police report, an eyewitness, and an expert accident reconstruction—clearly supported the plaintiff’s version of events. The appellate court found it unreasonable for the defendant to believe he would prevail, and awarded cost of proof sanctions to the plaintiff.
- Laabs v. City of Victorville (2008) 163 Cal.App.4th 1242 emphasized that sanctions may apply when a denial is not grounded in a “reasonably entertained good faith belief” that the denying party would prevail at trial.
- Wimberly v. Derby Cycle Corp. (1997) 56 Cal.App.4th 618 is another example where a party faced sanctions for denying straightforward RFAs that were later proven at trial.
Takeaway
Don’t underestimate the strategic value of RFAs. When used effectively—and enforced through CCP § 2033.420—they can not only clarify trial issues but also shift the financial burden when the opposing party plays hardball without basis.