Docket No. B108546. March 27, 1997. Appeal from Superior Court of Los Angeles County, No. BC131389, Frances Rothschild, Judge. COUNSEL Cox, Castle Nicholson, Jeffrey D. Masters and Mark Moore for Petitioner. No appearance for Respondent. Horvitz Levy, Peter Abrahams, Andrea M. Gauthier, Murtaugh, Miller, Meyer Nelson, Bradford H. Miller and Gregory M. Heuser for Real Party in Interest. OPINION VOGEL (Miriam A.), J. — BACKGROUND Several lawsuits alleging construction defects were filed against Glenfed
(a) Separate statement required Except as provided in (b), any motion involving the content of a discovery request or the responses to such a request must be accompanied by a separate statement. The motions that require a separate statement include a motion: (1) To compel further responses to requests for admission; (2) To compel further responses to interrogatories; (3) To compel further responses to a demand for inspection of documents or tangible things; (4) To compel answers at a deposition;
(a) Sanctions despite no opposition The court may award sanctions under the Discovery Act in favor of a party who files a motion to compel discovery, even though no opposition to the motion was filed, or opposition to the motion was withdrawn, or the requested discovery was provided to the moving party after the motion was filed. (b) Failure to oppose not an admission The failure to file a written opposition or to appear at a hearing or the voluntary provision of discovery shall not be deemed an