Wendy Rivas vs The Morning Star Company, et al.

25CV-03692 Wendy Rivas vs The Morning Star Company, et al.

Motion to Compel Further Responses to Request for Production of Documents, Set One

The motion to compel further responses to Request for Production of Documents, Set One, is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Plaintiff asserts that all relevant documents have been produced and that the redacted portions are not relevant. Should Plaintiff’s assertions be false, the court has the power to exclude documents or other physical evidence at trial that has been concealed and that would cause unfair surprise at trial. (Pate v. Channel Lumber Co. (1997) 51 Cal.App.4th 1447, 1455-1456.)

However, Plaintiff is to provide a privilege log for the redactions. If after review of the privilege log, should Defendant deem the redactions unjustified they are able to renew their motion.

Plaintiff is to serve the privilege log by July 6, 2026.

Defendant’s request for monetary sanctions is DENIED.

Motion to Compel Further Responses to Form Interrogatories-Employment Law, Set One

The motion to compel further responses to Form Interrogatories-Employment Law, Set One, is DENIED.

Plaintiff provided substantially compliant responses to the interrogatories at issue. The fact that Plaintiff may have subsequently recalled further information in her deposition does not render the initial responses deficient.

If Defendant deems the additional information obtained at deposition to be insufficient, their recourse is to propound supplemental interrogatories pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 2030.070.

Defendant’s request for monetary sanctions is DENIED.