HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN VS. NAN MCKAY & ASSOCIATES, INC. A CALIFORNIA ET AL

Matter on the Law & Motion / Discovery calendar for Thursday, July 10, 2025, Line 4. 1 - PLAINTIFF HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO's Motion To Compel Further Responses To Requests For Admissions, Set 4. Hearing required. The court's tentative appears below.

Plaintiff the Housing Authority of the City and County of San Francisco's motion to compel further responses to its requests for admissions, set four, nos. 26-43, is granted. The court disagrees that the RFAs duplicate Form Interrogatory 15.1. The prior interrogatory asked for facts supporting affirmative defenses; the present RFAs seek an admission that certain of Nan McKay Associates, Inc.'s affirmative defenses lack factual support. (Professional Career Colleges, Magna Institute, Inc. v. Superior Court (1989) 207 Cal.App.3d 490, 493, is distinguishable because that case involved an interrogatory whose substance was identical to a prior question.)

The court further concludes that the RFAs serve a proper purpose. If the Housing Authority obtains the admissions it seeks, it can use the RFAs to move for summary adjudication on affirmative defenses that lack factual support. If Nan McKay denies the RFAs, Form Interrogatory 17.1 and Request for Production 95 require it to provide factual support for its denial.

The court concludes that Nan McKay's objections lack substantial justification, orders Nan McKay to amend its responses, and orders Nan McKay to pay sanctions of $2000 to the Housing Authority within 30 days.

The court has ordered "hearing required" to discuss with the parties whether it makes sense to stage the amended responses for after the parties have come closer to completing their ESI productions. The Housing Authority is correct that Nan McKay should have some factual basis to allege any affirmative defenses, but they may be alleged in a pleading on information and belief. Amended responses after document discovery has occurred will be more useful in advancing the case. The parties should be prepared at the hearing to propose specific dates for the amended responses.

For the 9:00 a.m. calendar, all attorneys and parties may appear in Department 301 remotely or in person. Remote hearings will be conducted by videoconference using Zoom. (Dept. 301 Zoom ID 161 502 4290; Passcode 700956.) 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 contestdept301tr@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.

The court no longer provides a court reporter in the Law & Motion or Discovery 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. =(301/CVA) | |