In the Matter of 24STCV31768

(Stanley Mosk Courthouse: Dept. 514) August 21, 2026 DEPARTMENT 514 LAW AND MOTION RULINGS

The Court has reviewed the default judgment papers submitted by Plaintiff. Plaintiff seeks $3,000,000 in damages, $529,215.63 in attorney's fees, and $1,150 in costs for a total of $3,530,365.63.

The Court finds there are several issues that must be addressed before default judgment may be entered. First, the Doe Defendants have not been dismissed. All defendants must be dismissed or defaulted before the Court will enter default judgment.

Second, the evidence as to the damages and liability of ShadowAndMittens, LLC is insufficient. The declaration of Steven Nia provides that Plaintiff entered into a contract with Defendants PLPII FLP and Papas. (Nia Decl., P.P. 11-12, 25.)

Third, Plaintiff does not provide sufficient evidence to support his request for $529,215.63 in attorney's fees.

Accordingly, the request for entry of judgment is denied without prejudice. Plaintiff may file a new request for entry of default judgment. The OSC is continued for approximately 90 days.

Case Number: 25STCV10674 Hearing Date: August 21, 2026 Dept: 514 Gamez v. Los Angeles Unified School District 25STCV10674

Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Defendant to Provide Further Responses to Employment Form Interrogatories (Set Two)

Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Defendant to Provide Further Responses to Special Interrogatories (Set Two)

Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Defendant to Provide Further Responses to Requests for Production (Set Two)

Tentative Ruling

The motions are granted in part and denied in part. Please see below for details.

Background

This case arises out of an employment relationship. On April 10, 2025, Verioska Gamez ("Plaintiff") filed the complaint in this action against Los Angeles Unified School District ("Defendant") and Does 1 through 50.

On August 21, 2025, Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint (the "FAC"), the operative pleading, asserting causes of action for: (1) failure to provide reasonable accommodation in violation of the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (the "FEHA"); (2) failure to engage in the interactive process in violation of the FEHA; (3) disability