| Case | County / Judge | Motion | Ruling | Indexed | Hearing |
|---|
Motion to Compel Responses to Special Interrogatories; Motion to Compel Responses to Request for Production of Documents; Motion to Compel Responses to Request for Admission; Motion to Compel Responses to Form Interrogatories
3. S-CV-0049514 Liu, Ping v. The Original Mowbrays Tree Service
Motion to Compel Production of Documents by Plaintiff’s Expert Witness, Randall C. Epperson, PhD.
Defendant’s motion is granted, subject to the parties entering into a protective order protecting the confidentiality of the documents.
4. S-CV-0049572 Roe, Jane v. Doe 1
Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Discovery
Date reserved, but no motion filed.
5. S-CV-0050494 Beaubien, Nicole v. Cinemark
Motion to Compel IME
Appearance of the parties is required on May 1, 2026 at 2:00 p.m. in Department 33. Counsel are directed to be prepared to discuss dates that are available for the IME.
6. S-CV-0053651 Langner, Karla v. Nolivo, Girolamo
Defendant Allison James of California, Inc.’s Motion to Compel Responses to Special Interrogatories, Set One, Propounded by Defendant to Plaintiff Karla Langner
Interrogatory No. 1 – All objections are overruled. Plaintiff is to respond to this interrogatory.
Interrogatory No. 3 – All objections are overruled. Plaintiff is to respond to this interrogatory.
Interrogatory No. 4 – All objections are overruled. Plaintiff is to respond to this interrogatory.
Interrogatory No. 6 – All objections are overruled. Plaintiff is to respond to this interrogatory.
Interrogatory No. 7 – All objections are overruled. Plaintiff is to respond to this interrogatory.
Interrogatory No. 9 – All objections are overruled. Plaintiff is to respond to this interrogatory.
Interrogatory No. 10 – All objections are overruled. Plaintiff is to respond to this interrogatory.
Interrogatory No. 12 – All objections are overruled. Plaintiff is to respond to this interrogatory.
Interrogatory No. 13 – All objections are overruled. Plaintiff is to respond to this interrogatory.
Interrogatory No. 15 – All objections are overruled. Plaintiff is to respond to this interrogatory.
Interrogatory No. 16 – All objections are overruled. Plaintiff is to respond to this interrogatory.
Interrogatory No. 18 – All objections are overruled. Plaintiff is to respond to this interrogatory.
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”
Plaintiff is to provide responses no later than June 1, 2026.
Defendant Allison James of California, Inc.’s request for monetary sanctions against plaintiff is granted in the amount of $1,710. Such sanctions shall be paid no later than June 1, 2026. Defendant Allison James of California, Inc.’s request for monetary sanctions against plaintiff’s counsel is denied.
Defendant Allison James of California, Inc.s’ Motion to Compel Responses to Request for Production of Documents, Set One, Propounded by Defendant to Plaintiff Karla Langner
Request For Production No. 1 – All objections are overruled. Plaintiff is to respond and comply with the request.
Request For Production No. 2 – All objections are overruled. Plaintiff is to respond and comply with the request.
Request For Production No. 3 – All objections are overruled. Plaintiff is to respond and comply with the request.
Request For Production No. 4 – All objections are overruled. Plaintiff is to respond and comply with the request.
Request For Production No. 5 – All objections are overruled. Plaintiff is to respond and comply with the request.
Request For Production No. 6 – All objections are overruled. Plaintiff is to respond and comply with the request.
Plaintiff is to provide responses and documents no later than June 1, 2026.
Defendant Allison James of California, Inc.’s request for monetary sanctions against plaintiff is granted in the amount of $1,010. Such sanctions shall be paid no later than June 1, 2026. Defendant Allison James of California, Inc.’s request for monetary sanctions against plaintiff’s counsel is denied.
Defendant Allison James of California, Inc.s’ Motion to Compel Responses to Request for Admission, Set One, Propounded by Defendant to Plaintiff Karla Langner
Attached to plaintiff’s response are supplemental responses. The parties have not had a meet and confer on those supplemental responses.
Appearance of the parties is required on May 1, 2026, at 2:00 p.m. in Department 33.
Defendant Allison James of California, Inc.s’ Motion to Compel Responses to Form Interrogatories, Set One, Propounded by Defendant to Plaintiff Karla Langner
Attached to plaintiff’s response are supplemental responses. The parties have not had a meet and confer on those supplemental responses.
Appearance of the parties is required on May 1, 2026, at 2:00 p.m. in Department 33.
7. S-CV-0053853 Francisco Benavidez v. John Mourier Construction
Defendant’s Motion to Compel Deposition
Appearance of the parties is required on May 1, 2026 at 2:00 p.m. in Department 33. Counsel are directed to be prepared to discuss dates that are available for the subject deposition.