DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CV0001019·marin·Civil·Contract
Hearing about 2 months agoGRANTED

Tovba Construction, Inc. v. Andrey Ponomarchuk, et al.

Motion – Compel answers to interrogatories

Hearing date
Jul 21, 2026
Department
A
Prevailing
Moving Party

Motion type

Browse all Motion to Compel Further Responses rulings statewide →

Monetary amounts referenced

$900

Parties

PlaintiffTovba Construction, Inc.
DefendantAndrey Ponomarchuk

Ruling

In order to expedite proceedings, the Court waives the requirement of facilitation in this matter. The unopposed motion of Defendant and Cross-Complainant Andrey Ponomarchuk (“Defendant”) to compel further responses is GRANTED. Plaintiff Tovba Construction, Inc. (“Plaintiff”) is ordered to provide further responses to Special Interrogatories No. 24 and 36 within ten (10) days notice of this Order.

Defendant’s request for sanctions is GRANTED in part. Defendant is awarded $900 in reasonable attorney’s fees incurred in connection with the motion. Plaintiff shall pay this amount to counsel for Defendant within twenty (20) days notice of this Order.

All parties must comply with Marin County Superior Court Local Rules, Rule 2.10(B) to contest the tentative decision. Parties who request oral argument are required to appear in person or remotely by ZOOM. Regardless of whether a party requests oral argument in accordance with Rule 2.10(B), the prevailing party shall prepare an order consistent with the announced ruling as required by Marin County Superior Court Local Rules, Rule 2.11.

The Zoom appearance information for June 2026 is as follows: https://marin-courts-ca-gov.zoomgov.com/j/1605267272?pwd=908CbP6TV2mhCAyai1nzo6lyz2dKaw.1 Meeting ID: 160 526 7272 Passcode: 026935

If you are unable to join by video, you may join by telephone by calling (669) 254-5252 and using the above-provided passcode. Zoom appearance information may also be found on the Court’s website: https://www.marin.courts.ca.gov

Cited authorities

Extracting citations 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?”

Answers reference only this ruling's text. Not legal advice — always verify against the source PDF.

Find similar rulings

Source

Share