DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CV-22-001828·stanislaus·Civil·Discovery
Hearing todayGRANTED, in part; DENIED, in part

LONGORIA, OSCAR vs CITY OF MODESTO

Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Compliance with Court Order and for Issue and Terminating Sanctions, and Request for Monetary Sanctions

Hearing date
Aug 28, 2026
Department
23
Prevailing
Plaintiff

Motion type

Browse all Motion to Compel Discovery rulings statewide →

Monetary amounts referenced

$1,860.00$1,560

Parties

PlaintiffOSCAR LONGORIA
DefendantCITY OF MODESTO

Ruling

Petition to Compel Uninsured/Underinsured Motorist Arbitration and to Appoint a Single Neutral Arbitrator - HEARING REQUIRED. The Court has questions regarding the proposed method of arbitrator selection.

The following are the tentative rulings for cases calendared before Judge Stacy P. Speiller in Department 22: ***There are no tentative rulings for Department 22***

The following are the tentative rulings for cases calendared before Judge Clifford Tong in Department 23:

CV-22-001828 - LONGORIA, OSCAR vs CITY OF MODESTO - Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Compliance with Court Order and for Issue and Terminating Sanctions, and Request for Monetary Sanctions in the Amount of $1,860.00 - GRANTED, in part; DENIED, in part.

The Court finds that Defendant's conduct in failing to timely comply with the Court's 2-26-26 order constitutes misuse of the discovery process (Code Civ. Proc. Sec. 2023.010(d), (g).) However, under the circumstances the Court notes the defense's attempt to provide compliant further verified responses in advance of the instant hearing and declines to award issue, evidence, or terminating sanctions at this time.

As Plaintiffs' reply brief demonstrates, Defendant's further verified responses appear incomplete, as the two subject requests and responses are identical as reflected therein and reference the same attached set of documents. Therefore, Defendant is again ordered to provide complete verified further responses, without objection, and to produce all responsive documents within 10 days. (Code Civ. Proc. Sec. 2031.320(c).)

The Court further finds that Defendant's conduct is attributable to its counsel and necessitated the instant motion, entitling Plaintiffs to an award of monetary sanctions herein. (Code Civ. Proc. Sec.Sec. 2031.320(c), 2023.010, 2023.030.) Therefore, $1,560 in additional monetary sanctions is awarded against defense counsel, payable to Plaintiff's counsel. Plaintiffs shall submit a revised form of order reflecting the Court's ruling herein.

CV-26-001860 - SELFHELP ENTERPRISES vs NORTHEAST TERRITORIES PATTERSON LLC - a) Defendant Hartley Patterson, LLC's Demurrer to Plaintiff's First, Third, Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Action - OVERRULED; b) Defendant 50 Fathom Curve, LLC's Demurrer to Amended Complaint - OVERRULED; c) Defendant Bruce Harrington's Demurrer to Plaintiff's Amended Complaint - SUSTAINED, with leave to amend; d) Defendant Bruce Harrington's Motion to Strike Plaintiff's Amended Complaint - DENIED, as MOOT.

a) The Court finds that the First Amended Complaint alleges sufficient factual support for the stated claims, including the alter ego allegations which form a substantial basis for such claims. The Court further notes that several of Defendant's arguments appear to turn on the evaluation of extrinsic evidence, which is inappropriate on demurrer.

b) The Court finds that the First Amended Complaint alleges sufficient factual support for the stated claims, including the alter ego allegations which form a substantial basis for such claims. The Court further notes that several of Defendant's arguments appear to turn on the evaluation of extrinsic evidence, which is inappropriate on demurrer.

c) The Court finds that the First Amended Complaint fails to allege sufficient factual support for the stated claims against Defendant Harrington. Specifically, the pleading fails to allege facts which, if established, would entitle Plaintiff to seek recovery from Defendant Harrington as the alter ego of the subject corporate entities.

d) The motion is MOOT, in view of the Court's ruling on the related demurrer.

CV-26-004467 - GOMES, KEVIN vs BOISE CASCADE COMPANY - Defendant's Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission of Timothy S. Anderson on Behalf of Defendants Boise Cascade Company and Lisa Carriguiry - GRANTED, and unopposed.

The application complies with the requirements of Cal. Rules of Ct., rule 9.40. The Court will sign the proposed order.

The following are the tentative rulings for cases calendared before Judge David Hood in Department 24:

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