DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CGC25623983·sf·Civil·Discovery Dispute
Hearing about 2 months agoCONTINUED

KURT GRIMES VS. RUSHMORE LOAN MANAGEMENT SERVICES, LLC ET AL

Motion To Compel Further Responses To Form Interrogatory 17.1 & Requests For Production Of Documents No.13, 14, 17 & 21

Hearing date
Jul 23, 2026
Department
301
Prevailing
N/A
Next hearing
Aug 31, 2026

Motion type

Browse all Motion to Compel Further Responses rulings statewide →

Monetary amounts referenced

$1000

Parties

PlaintiffKURT GRIMES
DefendantRUSHMORE LOAN MANAGEMENT SERVICES, LLC

Ruling

Matter on the DISCOVERY / LAW and MOTION CALENDAR for Thursday, Jul-23-2026. LINE 5. PLAINTIFF KURT GRIMES' Motion To Compel Further Responses To Form Interrogatory 17.1 & Requests For Production Of Documents No.13, 14, 17 & 21.

Plaintiff's motion to compel further responses to form interrogatory 17.1 and requests for production nos. 13, 14, 17, and 21 is continued for hearing to August 31, 2026.

Plaintiff did not adequately meet and confer before bringing this motion. Sending meet-and-confer correspondence with a one-day turnaround deadline is not a reasonable, good faith attempt to narrow the disputes before the court. Plaintiff should begin his informal resolution efforts earlier or seek a stipulation to extend the motion-filing deadline; that plaintiff was close to the deadline when he filed is a problem of his own making. However, the court exercises its discretion to continue the motion rather than denying it outright.

The court orders the parties to meet and confer telephonically or in person regarding the disputed discovery. If Plaintiff continues to seek a court order, he may file a supplemental brief by August 17, 2026. The supplemental brief must be accompanied by a separate statement that fully complies with Rule of Court 3.1345 concerning any requests on which plaintiff seeks further relief. Defendant may file a supplemental brief, with a responding separate statement, by August 24, 2026.

Plaintiff's failure to meet and confer is a misuse of the discovery process and foists unnecessary burdens on the court and the opposing party. (Code Civ. Proc., sec. 2023.010, subd. (i).) Plaintiff shall pay partial sanctions of $1000 to defendants by August 24, 2026. The court may award further sanctions at the continued hearing against any party who has taken a discovery position lacking substantial justification. (Id., sec. 2030.300, subd. (d); id. sec. 2031.310, subd. (h).)

For the 9:00 a.m. calendar, all attorneys and parties may appear in Department 301 remotely or in person. Remote hearings will be conducted by videoconference using Zoom. (Dept. 301 Zoom ID 161 502 4290; Passcode 700956.) To appear remotely at the hearing, go to the court's website at sfsuperiorcourt.org under "Online Services," navigate to "Tentative Rulings," and click on the appropriate link, or dial the corresponding phone number.

Any party who contests a tentative ruling must send an email to contestdept301tr@sftc.org with a copy to all other parties by 4pm stating, without argument, the portion(s) of the tentative ruling that the party contests. The subject line of the email shall include the line number, case name and case number. The text of the email shall include the name and contact information, including email address, of the attorney or party who will appear at the hearing.

The court no longer provides a court reporter in the Law & Motion or Discovery Department. Parties may retain their own reporter, who may appear in the courtroom or remotely. A retained reporter must be a California certified court reporter (CSR), for only a CSR's transcript may be used in California courts. If a CSR is being retained, include in your email all of the following: their name, CSR and telephone numbers, and their individual work email address. =(301/CVA) | |

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