Holcomb vs. Aliso Villas Condominium Association
Motion for Attorney Fees
Motion type
Monetary amounts referenced
Parties
Attorneys
Ruling
Accordingly, the motion of defendants Aliso Villas Condominium Association and Total Property Management, Inc., for an award of $48,111.00 as reasonable attorneys’ fees incurred in connection with the appeal brought by plaintiff and appellant Scott Palmer Holcomb is GRANTED.
Moving party to give notice.
2. 30-2025-01469044- Before the Court are the following TEN (10) motions: two CU-PO-CJC (2) Motions to Compel Further Responses to Request for Michaud vs. Production of Documents (“MF-RFP”), Set Two, and Costco Wholesale Sanctions (ROA 446), brought by Plaintiff Valeda Michaud, Membership, Inc by and through her Guardian Ad Litem, Melanie Michaud (collectively, “Michaud”), and Charles Michaud (collectively, “Plaintiffs”), one against Defendant Costo Wholesale Corporation (“Corporation”), and one against Defendant Costco Wholesale Membership, Inc. (“Membership”) (collectively, “Defendants”); two (2) MF- RFP, Set One, and Sanctions (ROA 450) brought by Plaintiffs, one against Corporation, and one against Membership; a Motion to Compel the Deposition (“MC- DEPO”) of Corporation’s employee Leigh Ann Ruijters (“Ruijters”), and Sanctions (ROA 451), brought by Michaud against Corporation; a Motion to Compel Further Responses to Request for Admissions (“MF-RFA”), Set Two, and Sanctions (ROA 453), brought by Plaintiffs against Membership; two (2) Motions to Compel Further Responses to Special Interrogatories (“MF-SROG”), Set Two (ROA 262), and Sanctions, brought by Plaintiffs, one against Corporation, and one against Membership; and two (2) MF- SROG, Set One, and Sanctions (ROA 449), brought by Plaintiffs, one against Membership, and one against Corporation.
As a preliminary matter, the Court notes that on March 27, 2026, the Court ordered Plaintiffs to file amended motions, declarations, and separate statements for the pending motions. ROA 400. On April 8, 2026, Plaintiffs filed amended moving papers as to all pending motions except for Plaintiffs’ MF-SROG, Set Two (ROA 262). The Court
Cited authorities
Extracted by Gemini Flash from the ruling text. Verify against the source PDF — LLM extraction may miss or mis-normalize citations.
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Ask about this ruling
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”
Powered by Gemini Flash Lite. Answers reference only this ruling's text. Not legal advice — always verify against the source PDF.