DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
S-CV-0055048·placer·Civil·Discovery
Hearing 8 days agoGRANTED

KHUMALO, LEEAH v. PENNEY OPCO

Defendant Penney OPCO, LLC’s Motion to Compel Further Responses to Form Interrogatories; Defendant Penney OPCO, LLC’s Motion to Compel Further Responses to Requests for Production of Documents

Hearing date
Aug 14, 2026
Department
1
Prevailing
Defendant

Motion type

Browse all Motion to Compel Further Responses rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffLEEAH KHUMALO
DefendantPENNEY OPCO, LLC

Ruling

PLACER COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT FRIDAY, CIVIL LAW AND MOTION DEPARTMENT 1 COMMISSIONER CHRISTINE S. DEHR TENTATIVE RULINGS FOR AUGUST 14, 2026 AT 8:30 A.M.

17. S-CV-0055048 KHUMALO, LEEAH v. PENNEY OPCO

NOTE: If oral argument is requested in this case, it shall be heard on AUGUST 18, 2026 AT 2:30 P.M. in DEPARTMENT 1.

Defendant Penney OPCO, LLC’s Motion to Compel Further Responses to Form Interrogatories – General (Set One)

The motion is granted.

Plaintiff shall provide verified responses, without further objections, to form interrogatories, general set one, nos. 6.4 through 6.7, by August 28, 2026.

Defendant Penney OPCO, LLC’s Motion to Compel Further Responses to Requests for Production of Documents (Set One)

The motion is granted.

Plaintiff shall provide verified responses and responsive documents, to request for production of documents, set one, nos. 21, 24, 25, and 26 by August 28, 2026. Plaintiff shall also provide a code-compliant privilege log for any privilege objections asserted.

///

PLACER SUPERIOR COURT – DEPARTMENT 1 Friday Civil Law and Motion – Tentative Rulings

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