DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
S-CV-0055258·placer·Civil·Civil
Hearing in about 4 hoursGRANTED IN PART

WAMPLER, DAVID v. TAYLOR, RYAN

Motion to Compel Plaintiff’s Responses to Form Interrogatories; Special Interrogatories; Requests for Production; and Issue Sanctions

Hearing date
Aug 28, 2026
Department
1
Prevailing
Moving Party

Motion type

Browse all Motion to Compel Discovery rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffDAVID WAMPLER
DefendantRYAN TAYLOR

Ruling

PLACER COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT FRIDAY, CIVIL LAW AND MOTION DEPARTMENT 1 COMMISSIONER CHRISTINE S. DEHR TENTATIVE RULINGS FOR AUGUST 28, 2026 AT 8:30 A.M.

12. S-CV-0055258 WAMPLER, DAVID v. TAYLOR, RYAN

NOTE: If oral argument is requested in this case, it shall be heard on AUGUST 28, 2026 AT 1:00 P.M. in DEPARTMENT 1.

Defendant Ryan Taylor’s Motion to Compel Plaintiff’s Responses to Form Interrogatories; Special Interrogatories; Requests for Production; and Issue Sanctions

The motion is granted in part.

Plaintiff David Wampler shall provide verified responses, without objections, to form interrogatories, set one, by September 25, 2026.

Plaintiff David Wampler shall provide verified responses, without objections, to special interrogatories, set one, by September 25, 2026.

Plaintiff David Wampler shall provide verified responses and responsive documents, without objections, to requests for production of documents, set one, by September 25, 2026.

The request for issue sanctions is denied. Nonetheless, plaintiff is advised that repeated conduct of failing to comply with discovery obligations may lead the court to find an abuse of the discovery process and award sanctions, including terminating sanctions, on that basis. (Laguna Auto Body v. Farmers Ins. Exchange (1991) 231 Cal.App.3d 481, overruled on other grounds in Garcia v. McCutchen (1997) 16 Cal.4th 469, 478, fn. 4.)

///

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