DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
21STCV30098·la·Civil·Insurance Bad Faith
Hearing in about 3 hoursGRANTED in part

Llanos v. Sedgwick Formally York Risk, et al.

Motion to Compel

Hearing date
Aug 19, 2026
Department
310
Prevailing
Mixed

Motion type

Browse all Motion to Compel Discovery rulings statewide →

Causes of action

Parties

PlaintiffJonathan Alvarez Llanos
DefendantAmerican Zurich Insurance Company

Ruling

Case No.: 21STCV30098 Matter: Motion to Compel Moving Party: Plaintiff Jonathan Alvarez Llanos Responding Party: Defendant American Zurich Insurance Company Notice: OK Ruling: The Motion is granted in part. Moving party to give notice. The Court encourages all parties to appear remotely via LA CourtConnect. If submitting on the Court's tentative ruling, please follow the instructions provided above.

This is an action in which Plaintiff Jonathan Alvarez Llanos alleges, among other things, that his insurer acted in bad faith while distributing funds related to his underinsured motorist claim. Plaintiff now seeks to compel Defendant American Zurich Insurance Company to produce documents at its deposition--specifically as to request no. 13, which seeks: "All DOCUMENTS RELATED TO evaluation of the CLAIM."

Defendant American Zurich Insurance Company is ordered to produce the correct, non-duplicative evaluation materials/worksheets for passenger Lalanika Narasinha Arachchige within 10 days of this order.

To the extent Defendant contends any responsive evaluation documents for Claim No. LA0107794A4 or Claim No. FPQ4554 were previously produced within its prior 672-page production, Defendant is ordered to provide Plaintiff with specific Bates numbers identifying those responsive documents within 10 days.

To the extent Defendant contends that no evaluation documents exist for Plaintiff Alvarez's UIM claim, Defendant is ordered to serve a comprehensive, verified declaration under penalty of perjury from a person with knowledge within 10 days detailing: whether the document(s) ever existed and the factual basis for their non-existence or loss.

Request No. 13 is not limited to forms labeled "Bodily Injury Worksheets"; it encompasses any document evaluating the UIM claim or documenting a decision not to evaluate it. If no evaluation materials exist because Defendant did not perform an individual evaluation, Defendant must state that unequivocally under oath.

The Motion is granted in part as set forth herein. In light of the IDC held by the Court and parties on August 13, 2026, the court will not award any sanctions Moving party to give notice.

Judge Kevin C. Brazile Department 310 Hearing Date: August 19, 2026 Case Name: Gomez, et al. v. Jones, et al.

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