DecisionDepot
California Legal Research
All cases
CIVSB2321194·sanbernardino·Civil·Discovery Dispute
GRANTED. Sanctions in the amount of $1,160.00 is GRANTED.

Devri-Jo Murakami v. Jameson REI Group, LLC, et al

Motion to Compel Further Responses to Request for Production, Set One (Nos. 1-4)

Hearing date
Apr 28, 2026
Department
R12
Prevailing
Plaintiff

Motion type

Motion to Compel Further Responses

Monetary amounts referenced

$1,160.00

Parties

PlaintiffDevri-Jo Murakami
DefendantJameson REI Group

Attorneys

Jeffrey Wilensfor Plaintiff

Ruling

1

TENTATIVE RULING FOR APRIL 28, 2026 Department R12 - Judge Kory Mathewson Devri-Jo Murakami v. Jameson REI Group, LLC, et al – CIVSB2321194 Motion: Motion to Compel Further Responses to Request for Production, Set One (Nos. 1-4) Movant: Plaintiff, Devri-Jo Murakami Respondent: Defendants, Jameson REI Group RULING: Motion to Compel Further Responses to Request for Production, Set One (Nos. 1- 4) is GRANTED. Sanctions in the amount of $1,160.00 is GRANTED. Verified responses without objections and sanctions due within 30 days.

Plaintiff - to provide Order(s) and give Notice. ______________________________________________________________________________

Plaintiff served requests for production on September 5, 2025, seeking documents related to all 100+ BHT trust deeds that went into default. Defendant Jameson served objection-only responses on October 10, 2025. (Declaration of Jeffrey Wilens, ¶ 5.) The parties met and conferred on October 30, 2025, at which time Defendant offered to produce documents concerning the nine of the 100+ similar transactions. Those documents were produced on November 12, 2025, but the supplemental written responses were produced November 25, 2025. Plaintiff reached out to confirm nothing else was going to be produced but Defendant’s counsel did not substantively respond. (Declaration of Jeffrey Wilens, ¶ 6.) As a result, Plaintiff was forced to bring this instant motion.

Defendants filed a late opposition on April 24, 2026. Within the Opposition, Defendant did not address any reason(s) for the late filing. Consequently, the court exercises its discretion to not consider the late Opposition filing. Plaintiff’s motion to compel further responses to Request for Production, Set One (Nos. 1-4), is granted. Sanctions are awarded in a reduced amount of $1,160.00.

Dated: April 28, 2026

____________________________ Judge Kory Mathewson

Cited authorities

Extracting citations from the ruling text…

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.

Source

Share