REVENUE CORP. VS. CORTEZ
MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO FORM INTERROGATORIES; MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES; MOTION TO COMPEL PRODUCTION; MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSE TO REQUESTS FOR ADMISSIONS
Motion type
Parties
Ruling
Plaintiff Grigor Sahakyan moves to compel defendant BMW of North America, LLC, to provide further responses to Requests for Production 9, 10, 24, 26, 27 and 32 (Set One), is CONTINUED to 10/13/26 at 9:00 a.m. in Dept. C32.
BMW failed to participate in the meet and confer process in good faith. Although in response to Plaintiff’s initial meet and confer letter dated February 13, 2026, BMW’s counsel engaged in a telephonic conference with Plaintiff’s counsel, BMW’s counsel failed to respond to the meet and confer letters subsequently sent by Plaintiff’s counsel on February 26, 2026 and March 11, 2026. (Faulk Decl., ¶¶ 5, 6, 8, 9.)
BMW is ordered to meet and confer in good faith either telephonically or in-person with Plaintiff to attempt to resolve each issue presente d by Plaintiff’s Motion. No later than 9 court days prior to the continued hearing, the parties are to file a Joint Statement which shall (1) describe the parties’ attempts to meet and confer pursuant to this order, (2) identify each discovery request that remains in dispute, and (3) each party’s position on the discovery request that remains in dispute.
Plaintiff to give notice.
3. REVENUE CORP. VS. CORTEZ 2025-01531657 1. MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO FORM INTERROGATORIES 2. MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES 3. MOTION TO COMPEL PRODUCTION 4. MOTION TO COMPELRESPONSE TO REQUESTS FOR ADMISSIONS
Plaintiff Revnue Corp.’s motions to compel defendant John Cortez to provide further responses to Plaintiff’s (1) Special Interrogatories, Set One; (2) Form Interrogatories, Set One; (3) Requests for Admission, Set One; and (4) Requests for Production of Documents, Set One, is COTINUED to 10/6/26 at 9:00 a.m., in Dept. C32.
The Court will rule on Defendants Demurrer first and determine whether this action is subject to abatement or a stay before ruling on the discovery issues which may be mooted by the court’s ruling on the Demurrer.
Plaintiff to give notice.
4. MORRIS VS. ASSA ABLOY ENTRANCE SYSTEMS US, INC. 2025-14998712 MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AMENDED COMPLAINT
Plaintiff Tisa Morris’ Motion for Leave to File a First Complaint is DENIED without prejudice.
Cited authorities
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?”