DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CGC23606676·sf·Civil·Discovery Dispute
Hearing 4 months agoGRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART

VI LUONG VS. 1468 8TH AVE. APARTMENTS ET AL

Notice Of Motion And Motion Of Defendant Margaret Choy For Order: (1) Enforcing November 17, 2025 Order Compelling Plaintiff Vi Luong To Pay Monetary Sanctions; (2) Monetary Sanctions (Ccp 177.5); (3) Failsafe Relief If Plaintiff Fails To Comply; And (4) Order To Show Cause Re Contempt (Ccp 1209, 1218)

Hearing date
May 5, 2026
Department
302
Prevailing
Moving Party

Motion type

Browse all Motion for Sanctions rulings statewide →

Monetary amounts referenced

$2,860.00

Parties

PlaintiffVi Luong
Defendant1468 8th Ave. Apartments
DefendantMargaret Choy

Ruling

SF Superior Court - Law & Motion / Discovery Dept 302 - CGC23606676 - May 5, 2026 Hearing date: May 5, 2026 Case number: CGC23606676 Case title: VI LUONG VS. 1468 8TH AVE. APARTMENTS ET AL Case Number: | | CGC23606676 | Case Title: | | VI LUONG VS. 1468 8TH AVE. APARTMENTS ET AL | Court Date: | | 2026-05-05 09:00 AM | Calendar Matter: | | Notice Of Motion And Motion Of Defendant Margaret Choy For Order: (1) Enforcing November 17, 2025 Order Compelling Plaintiff Vi Luong To Pay Monetary Sanctions; (2) Monetary Sanctions (Ccp 177.5); (3) Failsafe Relief If Plaintiff Fails To Comply; And (4) Order To Show Cause Re Contempt (Ccp 1209, 1218) | Rulings: | | Set for Law and Motion/Discovery Calendar on Tuesday, May 05, 2026, Line 2.

Defendant Margaret Choy's unopposed Motion For Order: (1) Enforcing November 17, 2025 Order Compelling Plaintiff Vi Luong To Pay Monetary Sanctions; (2) Monetary Sanctions (CCP 177.5); (3) Failsafe Relief If Plaintiff Fails To Comply; And (4) Order To Show Cause Re Contempt (CCP 1209, 1218) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART.

On November 17, 2025, the court ordered Plaintiff Vi Luong to pay Defendant Margaret Choy discovery sanctions in the amount of $2,860.00. Defendant provided notice of entry of the order the next day. The court ordered payment by December 3, 2025. The record demonstrates Plaintiff has not yet paid the sanctions.

Good cause appearing, Plaintiff Vi Luong is ordered to pay Defendant Margaret Choy the discovery sanctions ordered on November 17, 2025, in the amount of $2,860.00 promptly but in no event later than June 30, 2026. At this time and on this record, the court declines to issue an OSC re Contempt. If Plaintiff does not pay the sanction by 6/30/2026, Defendant may renew her motion for an OSC re Contempt. If she does so, she must demonstrate all requirements for an OSC have been met and she must lodge with her moving papers a compliant and complete proposed OSC and provide a courtesy copy of the proposed OSC when she lodges the courtesy copies of her moving papers. To the extent Defendant seeks additional or different relief, the request is denied.

For the 9:00 a.m. calendar, all attorneys and parties may appear in Department 302 remotely or in person. Remote hearings will be conducted by videoconference using Zoom. (Dept. 302 Zoom ID 160 409 7690; Passcode 516287.) 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 contestdept302tr@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.

Counsel for the prevailing party is required to prepare a proposed order which repeats verbatim the substantive portion of the tentative ruling and must email it to contestdept302tr@sftc.org prior to the hearing even if the tentative ruling is not contested.

The court no longer provides a court reporter in the Law & Motion 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. =(302/JMQ) | |

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