DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
25STCV33795·la·Civil·Personal Injury
Hearing in about 2 hoursCONTINUED

Plaintiff v. Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc.

Motion to compel responses to form and special interrogatories; Request for production of documents; Order deeming admitted requests for admission; Motion for sanctions

Hearing date
Sep 4, 2026
Department
734
Judge
Prevailing
N/A
Next hearing
Oct 5, 2026

Motion type

Browse all Motion to Compel Discovery rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffPlaintiff
DefendantChipotle Mexican Grill, Inc.

Ruling

pursuant to California Rule of Court 3.1308(a)(1). No later than 4:00 p.m. on DATE \@ "MMMM d, yyyy" September 3, 2026, the moving and opposing parties must provide notice to ALL OTHER PARTIES and the staff of Department 734 whether the party intends to (1) appear and argue the motion, or (2) submit to the tentative ruling. Notice to Department 734 should be sent by email to smcdept734@lacourt.org, with opposing parties copied on the email. The high volume of telephone calls to Department 734 may delay the Court's receipt of notice, so telephonic notice to 213-830-0776 should be reserved for situations where parties are unable to give notice by email.

This is a Lemon Law action based on alleged defects in a 2021 Jeep Grand Cherokee. Defendant FCA US, LLC moves for sanctions against Plaintiffs pursuant to Code Civ. Proc. Sec. 871.26(j).

As a result of Plaintiffs' filing an untimely opposition 4 days after the due date, the hearing on Defendant FCA US, LLC's motion for sanctions is CONTINUED to September 21, 2026 at 8:30 a.m. Defendant is to file a reply by September 14, 2026, addressing whether Plaintiff has produced the required documents or provided all information mandated by Code Civ. Proc. Sec. 871.26(f) & (g).

The following tentative ruling is issued pursuant to Rule of Court 3.1308 at DATE \@ "h:mm am/pm" 12:41 PM on DATE \@ "MMMM d, yyyy" September 3, 2026. Rule of Court 3.1308(a)(1) provides that a "tentative ruling will become the ruling of the court if the court has not directed oral argument by its tentative ruling and notice of intent to appear has not been given." The Court does not desire oral argument on the motion addressed herein. Notice of intent to appear is REQUIRED pursuant to California Rule of Court 3.1308(a)(1).

No later than 4:00 p.m. on DATE \@ "MMMM d, yyyy" September 3, 2026, the moving and opposing parties must provide notice to ALL OTHER PARTIES and the staff of Department 734 whether the party intends to (1) appear and argue the motion, or (2) submit to the tentative ruling. Notice to Department 734 should be sent by email to smcdept734@lacourt.org, with opposing parties copied on the email. The high volume of telephone calls to Department 734 may delay the Court's receipt of notice, so telephonic notice to 213-830-0776 should be reserved for situations where parties are unable to give notice by email.

Plaintiff alleges that he purchased a Chipotle burrito and bit into an avocado stem that cracked and chipped his tooth. Defendant Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc. moves to compel responses to form and special interrogatories and requests for production of documents propounded upon Plaintiff, as well as an order deeming admitted requests for admission. Defendant also requests the imposition of sanctions.

TENTATIVE RULING

The hearing on Defendant Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc.'s motions to compel responses to form and special interrogatories, set one, requests for production of documents and for an order deeming admitted requests for admission, and for sanctions, as against Plaintiff were continued to this date. Defendant served these motions by electronic service only. However, "[u] nrepresented persons are exempt from any mandatory electronic filing imposed pursuant to this subdivision." (Civ. Proc. Code Sec. 1010.6(f)(2).) Self-represented parties or self-represented persons are to be served by non-electronic methods unless they affirmatively consent to electronic service. (Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 2.251(c)(3)(B).)

Defendant was previously ordered to serve the motions and notice of the continuance by mail upon Plaintiff. However, notice of these motions were served by mail on August 12, 2026, which is only 16 court days plus 1 calendar day prior to the September 4, 2026 hearing date. An additional 4 calendar days for service by mail was required. (Code Civ. Proc. Sec. 1005(b).)

As such, the hearing on Defendant's motions to compel responses to form and special interrogatories, set one, requests for production of documents and for an order deeming admitted requests for admission, and for sanctions, as against Plaintiff is CONTINUED to October 5, 2026 at 8:30 a.m. Defendant to give notice of the continuance by mail forthwith. If Defendant does not establish proper, timely service of notice for the October 5, 2026 hearing date, the Court will order the motions off calendar for repeated failure to serve statutory notice in the manner required by statute.

Case Number: BC672941 Hearing Date: September 4, 2026 Dept: 734

The following tentative ruling is issued pursuant to Rule of Court 3.1308 at DATE \@ "h:mm am/pm" 12:41 PM on DATE \@ "MMMM d, yyyy" September 3, 2026. Rule of Court 3.1308(a)(1) provides that a "tentative ruling will become the ruling of the court if the court has not directed oral argument by its tentative ruling and notice of intent to appear has not been given." The Court does not desire oral argument on the motion addressed herein. Notice of intent to appear is REQUIRED pursuant to California Rule of Court 3.1308(a)(1). No

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