Bank of America, N.A. v. Prashant Tyagi

Moreover, there is no evidence to suggest Defendants acted in bad faith in connection with its request.

The motion is granted.

6. CU0002626 Bank of America, N.A. v. Prashant Tyagi

One of the parties apparently reserved this date for the filing of a motion; none was filed. This matter is removed from calendar.

7. CU0002738 Roberta McGregor v. Victoria Yeager

No appearances are required. The Court, on its own motion, continues the hearing for this motion until September 4, 2026 at 10:00 a.m. in Department 6.

The tentative ruling for purposes of the September 4, 2026, hearing is as follows: Defendant/Cross-Complainant Victoria S. Yeager’s (“Defendant”) motion regarding discovery is granted in part. The Court grants Defendant’s motion for an order deeming its Requests for Admission (Sets One and Two) directed to Plaintiff Roberta McGregor as admitted, unless Plaintiff serves substantially compliant responses before the scheduled hearing on September 4, 2026. The Court grants Defendant’s motion to compel initial responses to Special Interrogatories (Set One) without objections.

The Court grants Defendant’s motion to compel further responses to Form Interrogatories (Sets One-Three), Special Interrogatories (Set Two), and Requests for Production of Documents (Sets One and Two) as described below. The Court denies Defendant’s request to propound additional discovery. The Court grants Defendant’s request for sanctions in part.

Briefing Under the Civil Rules of Procedure and Rules of Court, a moving party is allowed to file a motion with a memorandum of points and authorities (15 pages maximum) and supporting documents, an opposing party is allowed to file a single opposition with memorandum (15 pages maximum) and supporting documents, and the moving party is permitted to file a single reply (10 pages maximum), all within circumscribed time periods. See Code Civ. Proc. 1005(b), Rules of Court, Rules 3.112-3.113. Plaintiff, without leave of Court, filed multiple oppositions. This was improper. In the exercise of its discretion, the Court considered the same. Henceforth, all briefing shall comply with the requirements of the Rules of Procedure and Rules of Court, without exception. The Court, as necessary, will exercise its authority to strike and disregard future filings that do not comply with these rules.

Form Interrogatories

Legal Standard

Under Code of Civil Procedure section 2030.300(a), a court may order a party to serve a further response to an interrogatory when the court finds that: “(1) An answer to a particular interrogatory is evasive or incomplete[;] (2) An exercise of the option to produce documents

6