DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CGC24617680·sf·Civil·Discovery Dispute
Hearing 9 months agoDENIED

JANE DOE VS. ERIC RHEINHEIMER

Notice Of Motion And Motion To Compel Per Ccp 2030.300, 2031.240 And 2031.320

Hearing date
Dec 4, 2025
Department
302
Prevailing
Defendant

Motion type

Browse all Motion to Compel Further Responses rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffJANE DOE
DefendantERIC RHEINHEIMER

Ruling

Set for Law and Motion/Discovery Calendar on Thursday, December 04, 2025, Line 5. 1 - PLAINTIFF JANE DOE's Motion To Compel Per Ccp 2030.300, 2031.240 And 2031.320.

Plaintiff Jane Doe's motion to compel Defendant Eric Rheinheimer to supplement his privilege log, supplement an interrogatory response, and produce additional documents responsive to Plaintiff's Requests for Production of Documents, Set One, is DENIED. (The Court's complete tentative ruling has been emailed to the parties).

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