JOSEPH GULLO vs. AHP SERVICING, LLC; ET AL.
Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Further Responses
Motion type
Browse all Motion to Compel Further Responses rulings statewide →
Parties
Ruling
Case No. CU24-09570
Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Further Responses
Plaintiff JOSEPH GULLO’s motion to compel further responses from Defendants AMROCK TITLE CALIFORNIA and LAND HOME FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC. is denied.
Plaintiff’s motion improperly seeks to compel further responses from multiple parties in one motion. Plaintiff’s initial motion did not include a separate statement of discovery requests at issue, as is required by Rule of Court 3.1345, and so did not allow Defendants an opportunity to respond to particular points of contention. Further, Plaintiff’s declaration in support of motion does not sufficiently detail Plaintiff’s efforts to meet and confer in good faith prior to filing a discover motion as it does not attach a copy of the meet and confer letter Plaintiff says he sent for examination, does not in the alternative specifically describe meet and confer efforts made, and does not sufficiently detail Defendants’ responses, if any.
ELAINE SCIACCA; ET AL. vs. AHMED ALSHERIF
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?”