DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
23STCV13211·la·Civil·Discovery Dispute
Hearing todayDENIED

Shabi Cohen v. FMB Development, LLC, et al.

Motion to Compel Further Responses to Requests for Production of Documents, Set One

Hearing date
Sep 9, 2026
Department
513
Prevailing
Opposing Party

Motion type

Browse all Motion to Compel Further Responses rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffShabi Cohen
DefendantFMB Development, LLC
DefendantIlan Kenig
Cross-ComplainantMoises Gilinski

Ruling

(Stanley Mosk Courthouse: Dept. 513) September 9, 2026 DEPARTMENT 513 LAW AND MOTION RULINGS

County of Los Angeles - Central District Department 513 SHABI COHEN; Plaintiff, vs. fmb development, llc, et al.; Defendants. | Case No.: |

| | | Hearing Date: | September 9, 2026 | | | Time: | 10:00 a.m. | | | [tentative] Order RE: motion TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSES TO REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS, SET ONE | MOVING PARTY: Defendant and Cross-Defendant Ilan Kenig

RESPONDING PARTY: Cross-Complainant Moises Gilinski Motion to Compel Further Responses to Requests for Production of Documents, Set One The court considered the moving and opposition papers filed in connection with this motion.

DISCUSSION Defendant and cross-defendant Ilan Kenig ("Kenig") filed and served this motion to compel further responses to Requests for Production of Documents, Set One, on cross-complainant Moises Gilinski ("Gilinski") by electronic service on August 17, 2026. (Motion, p. 19, Proof of Service.)

The court finds that Kenig has not given proper notice of this motion. "[A]ll moving and supporting papers shall be served and filed at least 16 court days before the hearing." (Code Civ. Proc., Sec. 1005, subd. (b).) The notice period is extended by two court days for electronic service. (Code Civ. Proc., Sec.Sec. 1010.6, subd. (a)(3)(B) ["Any period of notice, or any right or duty to do any act or make any response within any period or on a date certain after the service of the document, which time period or date is prescribed by statute or rule of court, shall be extended after service by electronic means by two court days . . ."] .)

The proof of service attached to this motion states that Kenig served it on Gilinski by electronic service on August 17, 2026. (Motion, p. 19, Proof of Service.) Sixteen court days before the September 9, 2026 hearing was August 17, 2026, which places the deadline for electronic service on August 13, 2026. The court therefore denies Kenig's motion because he did not give the required statutory notice of the motion and hearing.

ORDER The court denies defendant and cross-defendant Ilan Kenig's motion to compel further responses from cross-complainant Moises Gilinski to Requests for Production of Documents, Set One. The court orders cross-complainant Moises Gilinski to give notice of this ruling. IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: September 9, 2026 _____________________________ Robert B. Broadbelt III Judge of the Superior Court Case Number: 23STCV17388 Hearing Date: September 9, 2026 Dept: 513 Superior Court of California County

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