DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CUD26682089·sf·Civil·Real Property / Housing
Hearing todayDENIED

KEVIN VED VS. TRI VAN LE ET AL

Motion For Terminating Sanctions (Ccp 2023.030(D), 1170.8)

Hearing date
Sep 4, 2026
Department
501
Prevailing
Defendant

Motion type

Browse all Motion for Sanctions rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffKEVIN VED
DefendantTRI VAN LE

Ruling

Real Property/Housing Court Law and Motion Calendar for September 4, 2026. Line 10. PLAINTIFF KEVIN VED Moiton For Terminating Sanctions (Ccp 2023.030(D), 1170.8)

Plaintiff admits that Defendant provided a further response on August 21, 2026, albeit after 5:00 p.m., and despite Plaintiff's argument, the further response does not contain any objections. Moreover, despite Plaintiff's argument in his moving papers that he cannot prepare for trial without the further discovery that Defendant still has not provided, Plaintiff has since represented to the Court that he is ready for trial now, and the trial of this action has been advanced to September 8, 2026 based on that representation. Motion for terminating sanctions is therefore DENIED.

However, Defendant's further responses are insufficient, are not code-compliant, and fail to address matters that were specifically discussed in the extended meet-and-confer proceedings conducted at court on August 20, 2026, e.g., discovery relating to the specific alleged subtenant that was named in the 10-Day Notice to Cure or Quit, Ed Oh. Therefore, the Court imposes an evidence sanction as follows: Defendant shall be precluded from objecting to any evidence, whether obtained in discovery or through some independent means, which Plaintiff may seek to introduce at trial relevant to matters which Plaintiff specifically sought to discover pursuant to Plaintiff's Request for Production of Documents (Set One), Nos. 1-8. =(501/CFH)

Parties may appear in-person, telephonically or via Zoom (Video - Webinar ID: 160 560 5023; Password: 172849; or Phone Dial in: (669) 254-5252; Webinar ID: 160 560 5023; Password: 172849). Parties who intend to appear at the hearing must give notice to opposing parties and the court promptly, but no later than 4:00 p.m. the court day before the hearing unless the tentative ruling has specified that a hearing is required.

Notice of contesting a tentative ruling shall be provided by sending an email to the court to Department501ContestTR@sftc.org with a copy to all other parties stating, without argument, the portion(s) of the tentative ruling that the party contests. A party may not argue at the hearing if the opposing party is not so notified, and the opposing party does not appear. | |

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