DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CGC24613947·sf·Civil·Lemon Law
Hearing 10 months agoGRANTED. Plaintiffs must produce the vehicle for inspection on a mutually agreeable date no later than October 25, 2025.

IRENE VALDEZ BOLANOS ET AL VS. NISSAN NORTH AMERICA, INC., A DELAWARE CORPORATION ET AL

Notice Of Motion And Motion To Compel Plaintiffs To Produce The Subject Vehicle For Inspection

Hearing date
Oct 17, 2025
Department
301
Judge
Prevailing
Moving Party

Motion type

Browse all Motion to Compel Discovery rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffIRENE VALDEZ BOLANOS
DefendantNISSAN NORTH AMERICA, INC.

Attorneys

Scott D. Sharpfor Defendant

Ruling

SF Superior Court - Law & Motion / Discovery Dept 301 - CGC24613947 - October 17, 2025 Hearing date: October 17, 2025 Case number: CGC24613947 Case title: IRENE VALDEZ BOLANOS ET AL VS. NISSAN NORTH AMERICA, INC., A DELAWARE CORPORATION ET AL Case Number: | | CGC24613947 | Case Title: | | IRENE VALDEZ BOLANOS ET AL VS. NISSAN NORTH AMERICA, INC., A DELAWARE CORPORATION ET AL | Court Date: | | 2025-10-17 09:00 AM | Calendar Matter: | | Notice Of Motion And Motion To Compel Plaintiffs To Produce The Subject Vehicle For Inspection; Declaration Of Scott D. Sharp In Support | Rulings: | | Matter on the Law & Motion/Discovery Calendar for Friday, October 17, 2025, line 9, 2 - DEFENDANT NISSAN NORTH AMERICA, INC.'S Motion To Compel Plaintiffs To Produce The Subject Vehicle For Inspection

Defendant Nissan North America, Inc.'s motion to compel plaintiffs to produce the subject vehicle for inspection is granted. Plaintiffs must produce the vehicle for inspection on a mutually agreeable date no later than October 25, 2025. Plaintiffs' failure to advise Nissan of an agreeable date for the inspection is sufficient grounds for granting the motion due to both sides well knowing that a vehicle inspection is a routine and expected part of the discovery in almost every Lemon Law case. Due to plaintiffs' failure to provide a date for the inspection, Nissan's prior meet and confer efforts were adequate to allow for the granting of this motion.

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.

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/HEK) | |

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