DESIRAE FERIA VS. SAN FRANCISCO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT ET AL

Matter on calendar for Friday, May 22, 2026, Line 5, PLAINTIFF DESIRAE FERIA's Motion To Compel Defendant San Francisco Unified School District To Provide Further Responses, Without Objection, And To Produce Documents Responsive To Requests For Production Of Documents (Set Seven).

1 - Plaintiff Desirae Feria's motion to compel defendant San Francisco Unified School District to make further responses to her requests for production nos. 143-167, for production, and for monetary, issue, and evidentiary sanctions is denied. Feria's motion lacks substantial justification and the court orders her to pay $855 in sanctions to SFUSD.

The RFPs at issue seek work product; they ask for all documents that SFUSD intends to use to impeach Feria and her witnesses at trial. An attorney's curation of which documents in the case they will use for impeachment is derivative, reflects the attorney's deliberations and impressions, and is entitled to absolute work product protection. (See Coito v. Superior Court (2012) 54 Cal.4th 480, 495.) The requests at issue here are more invasive of counsel's preparation than those at issue in City of Long Beach v. Superior Court (1976) 64 Cal.App.3d 65, which merely asked for a list of trial witnesses and did not invade the content of counsel's planned cross-examination.

In addition, Feria's motion was untimely noticed. A motion must be noticed with sixteen court days plus time for service. (See Code Civ. Proc., sec. 1005, subd. (b); id., sec. 1010.6, subd. (a)(3)(B) [electronic service extends "[a]ny period of notice" by two days, in addition to extending "any . . . duty to . . . make any response"].)

In addition, Feria's motion seeks issue and evidentiary sanctions without showing that SFUSD has failed to comply with a discovery order. Ordinarily, "the discovery statutes evince an incremental approach to discovery sanctions . . . ." (Creed-21 v. City of Wildomar (2017) 18 Cal.App.5th 690, 701.) It is generally unwarranted for a court to impose an issue or evidentiary sanction as first recourse. Feria's discovery position lacks substantial justification and SFUSD's requested sanctions are reasonable. (See Code Civ. Proc., sec. 2031.310, subd. (h).) Feria shall pay $855 in sanctions to SFUSD.

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.

Counsel for the prevailing party is required to prepare a proposed order which repeats verbatim the substantive portion of the tentative ruling and must email it to contestdept301tr@sftc.org prior to the hearing even if the tentative ruling is not contested.

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) | |