MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO SPECIAL INTERRROGATORIES; MOTION TO COMPEL PRODUCTION; MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSE TO REQUESTS FOR ADMISSIONS
# Case Name Tentative
1. BLATT VS. COUNTY OF ORANGE 2025-01481733 MOTION TO APPEAR PRO HAC VICE
The Application of William D. Adams to Appear Pro Hac Vice for defendants County of Orange and Sierra Aviation Group, Inc. is GRANTED.
Moving attorney has satisfied all the requirements of California Rules of Court, Rule 9.40.
Moving attorney to give notice.
2. TC BROTHERS ENTERPRISES, INC. VS. BOWLERO CORPORATION 2023-01313029 1. MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO SPECIAL INTERRROGATORIES Defendant AMF Bowling Centers Inc.’s motion to compel plaintiff TC Brothers Enterprises, Inc. dba Servpro of Walnut, Hacienda Heights, Rowland Heights to serve responses to Defendant’s Special Interrogatories, Set One is DENIED as MOOT.
Plaintiff served verified responses without objections to Defendant’s Special Interrogatories, Set One, on December 8, 2025. (Reed Decl., ¶ 9.) Thus, the Motion is moot.
Defendant’s request for sanctions is DENIED. Plaintiff has shown it acted with substantial justification in submitting responses in a timely manner after counsel had a personal emergency.
Moving Defendant to give notice.
2. MOTION TO COMPEL PRODUCTION Defendant AMF Bowling Centers Inc.’s motion to compel plaintiff TC Brothers Enterprises, Inc. dba Servpro Of Walnut, Hacienda Heights, Rowland Heights to serve verified, objection-free responses to Defendant’s Request for Production of Documents, Set One, is DENIED as MOOT.
Plaintiff served verified responses without objections to Defendant’s Request for Production of Documents, Set One, on December 8, 2025. (Reed Decl., ¶ 9.) Thus, the Motion is moot.
Defendant’s request for sanctions is DENIED. Plaintiff has shown it acted with substantial justification in submitting responses in a timely manner after counsel had a personal emergency.
Moving Defendant to give notice.
3. MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSE TO REQUESTS FOR ADMISSIONS Defendant AMF Bowling Centers Inc.’s motion to deem matters set forth in Defendant’s Requests for Admission to plaintiff TC Brothers Enterprises, Inc. dba Servpro of Walnut, Hacienda Heights, Rowland Heights admitted, is DENIED as MOOT.
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?”
Defendant’s request for sanctions is DENIED. Plaintiff has shown it acted with substantial justification in submitting responses in a timely manner after counsel had a personal emergency.
Moving Defendant to give notice.
3. CALVILLO VS. VILLEGAS 2025-01471415 1. MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSES TO FORM INTERROGATORIES
Defendants Germaine Y. Ninete and Serissa Frankee Ninete Villegas’ motion to compel Plaintiff Daniel Rico Calvillo to provide a further, verified response to Defendants’ Form Interrogatories, Set One, Nos. 2.7, 6.7, 7.1, 7.2, 10.3, and 20.11 is GRANTED.
Form Interrogatory No. 2.7:
Form Interrogatory No. 2.7 seeks (a) the name and address of each school or other academic or vocational institution Plaintiff attended beginning with high school; (b) the dates attended; (c) the highest grade level completed; and (d) the degrees received.
Plaintiff objected to the interrogatory on the grounds that it seeks irrelevant information, is not reasonably calculated to lead to discovery of admissible evidence, seeks information equally available to Defendants and invades Plaintiff’s right to privacy.
The burden is on the responding party to justify any objection or failure fully to answer the interrogatories. (Coy v. Sup.Ct. (Wolcher) (1962) 58 Cal.2d 210, 220-221; Fairmont Ins. Co. v. Sup.Ct. (Stendell) (2000) 22 Cal.4th 245, 255.) Plaintiff has not filed an opposition and failed to justify the objections.
Therefore, the request to compel a further response to Form Interrogatory No. 2.7 is GRANTED.
Form Interrogatory No. 6.7:
Form Interrogatory No. 6.7 asks if any health care provider advised Plaintiff that he may require future or additional treatment for any injuries that he attributes to the incident? If so, for each injury the