Not stated v. District
Motion to compel further responses to form interrogatories
Motion type
Browse all Motion to Compel Further Responses rulings statewide →
Parties
Ruling
(Compton Courthouse: Dept. A) September 8, 2026 DEPARTMENT A LAW AND MOTION RULINGS INSTRUCTIONS: If the parties wish to submit on the tentative ruling and avoid a court appearance on the matter, the moving party must: 1. Contact the opposing party and all other parties who have appeared in the action and confirm that each will submit on the tentative ruling.
2. No later than 4:00 p.m. on the court day before the hearing, call the Courtroom (310-761-4302) advising that all parties will submit on the tentative ruling and waive hearing; and 3. Serve notice of the Court's ruling on all parties entitled to receive service. If this procedure is followed, when the case is called the Court will enter its ruling on the motion in accordance with its tentative ruling. If any party declines to submit on the tentative ruling, then no telephone call is necessary, and all parties should appear at the hearing. If there is neither a telephone call nor an appearance, then the matter may either be taken off calendar or ruled on. TENTATIVE RULINGS -- http://www.lacourt.org/tentativeRulingNet/u i/main.aspx’casetype=civil
to compel further responses to form interrogatories. The motion fails to comply with CRC rule 3.1345, subd. (c). by failing to provide the text of District's discovery responses verbatim in the supporting separate statement, instead summarizing the responses. It appears to the court that District has fully complied with the requests by serving compliant responses rendering the motion moot except as to sanctions. Based Plaintiff's failure to comply with rule 3.1345, the court declines to award plaintiff monetary sanctions. Plaintiff is ordered to give notice. Case Number: 26CMCV01203 Hearing Date: September 8, 2026 Dept: A SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - SOUTH CENTRAL DISTRICT WSAV ARTESIA OWNER IX, L.P, Plaintiff, vs. QUALITY SERVICE TRUCKING, INC., Defendant. |)))))))))))))))
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?”