| Case | County / Judge | Motion | Ruling | Indexed | Hearing |
|---|
MOTION TO QUASH SUBPOENAS
Matter on the Law & Motion / Discovery calendar for Tuesday, October 7, 2025, Line 2. 1 - DEFENDANTS TIMOTHY GEE, J. HAYES, MARTI JIMENA, AND 1810 JACKSON STREET HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION's MOTION TO QUASH SUBPOENAS.
Defendant's motion to quash deposition subpoenas is continued to October 28, 2025.
Defendant's First Amended Cross-Complaint alleges that plaintiff's use of a storage area is a breach of the parties' CC&Rs and has or will lead to an increase in insurance rates. (Plaintiff's RJN, Ex. A [First Amended Cross-Complaint, pars. 17, 30].) Based on this theory of liability, plaintiff properly subpoenaed three of defendant's insurers who have documents reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. (Code Civ. Proc., section 2017.010.)
Plaintiff's subpoenas, however, are overbroad as they seek "[a]ll DOCUMENTS" and "[a]ll COMMUNICATIONS" relating to the policies. (Vardeh Decl., Exs. A-C.) The subpoenas are not limited in time and seek information protected by the attorney-client privilege and work product doctrine.
On September 9, 2025, defendant noted these issues by letter. (Vardeh Declaration, Ex. D.) Plaintiff responded on September 10, 2025, and stated that she needed more time to respond to the letter and extended the time to file a motion to quash. (Grove Decl., pars. 6-7.) Defendant failed to meet and confer in good faith and filed this motion on September 10, 2025.
The court orders the parties to meet and confer. The parties should discuss limiting the subpoenas to documents regarding an increase or potential increase in insurance premiums, exclusion of attorney-client communications and work-product material, the propriety of a "first look" agreement, preparation of a privilege log, the amount of coverage and applicability of Civil Code section 5800, etc.
On October 20, 2025, each side may file a supplemental brief outlining what progress has been made and any outstanding issues. The court defers ruling on the sanctions issue to October 28, 2025.
For the 9:00 a.m. calendar, all attorneys and parties may appear in Department 301 remotely or in person. Remote hearings will be conducted by videoconference using Zoom. (Dept. 301 Zoom ID 161 502 4290; Passcode 700956.) To appear remotely at the hearing, go to the court's website at sfsuperiorcourt.org under "Online Services," navigate to "Tentative Rulings," and click on the appropriate link, or dial the corresponding phone number.
Any party who contests a tentative ruling must send an email to contestdept301tr@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.
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”
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 contestdept301tr@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 or Discovery 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. =(301/CVA) |