DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CGC22601268·sf·Civil·Discovery Dispute
Hearing 12 months agoGRANTED; sanctions DENIED

LORAN SIMON VS. TODD BRABEC ET AL

DEFENDANT 426 FILLMORE ASSOCIATIONS' MOTION TO COMPEL PLAINTIFFS FURTHER RESPONSES TO FORM INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE, AND REQUEST FOR MONETARY SANCTIONS

Hearing date
Aug 22, 2025
Department
302
Judge
Prevailing
Moving Party

Motion type

Browse all Motion to Compel Further Responses rulings statewide →

Monetary amounts referenced

$3,385.00

Parties

PlaintiffLORAN SIMON
DefendantTODD BRABEC
Defendant426 FILLMORE ASSOCIATIONS

Ruling

Set for Law and Motion/Discovery Calendar on Friday, August 22, 2025, Line 3. 1- DEFENDANT 426 FILLMORE ASSOCIATIONS' MOTION TO COMPEL PLAINTIFFS FURTHER RESPONSES TO FORM INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE, AND REQUEST FOR MONETARY SANCTIONS OF $3,385.00 AGAINST PLAINTIFF.

Defendant 426 Filmore's motion to compel plaintiff's further responses to its set one form interrogatories is granted. Plaintiff must serve verified code-compliant further responses to 426 Fillmore's first set of form interrogatories no later than September 12, 2025.

The court construes the recent order re-opening discovery as applying to this motion. Moreover, given that plaintiff was able to have at least one discovery motion heard that would have been untimely under his arguments, ruling on the merits of this motion avoids the unfairness of treating the parties dissimilarly as to the timeliness issue. Accordingly, all of plaintiff's late-file objections are overruled and this motion is deemed timely.

Plaintiff's responses were inadequate and contrary to the letter and spirit of the discovery statutes. Plaintiff is required to respond to this discovery notwithstanding that he is not represented by counsel and that this discovery may be similar to discovery propounded by other other defendants. Because plaintiff's untimely objections had substantial justification, no monetary sanctions are awarded.

For the 9:00 a.m. calendar, all attorneys and parties may appear in Department 302 remotely or in person. Remote hearings will be conducted by videoconference using Zoom. (Dept. 302 Zoom ID 160 409 7690; Passcode 516287.) 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 contestdept302tr@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 contestdept302tr@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 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. =(302/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