Motion to Compel
Browse all Motion to Compel Further Responses rulings statewide →
SUPERIOR COURT, STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA Department 12 Honorable Nahal Iravani-Sani, Presiding Courtroom Clerk, Ryan Nguyen 191 North First Street, San Jose, CA 95113 Telephone: (408) 882-2230
DATE: 05/27/2026 TIME: 9:00 A.M. and 9:01 A.M.
LINE 4 24CV431226 Kimberly Chaffee MOTION: OTHER v. Nimisha Garg et al. Plaintiff, in pro per, files a motion seeking disclosure of settlement and sanctions against Plaintiff’s former counsel in this action. The motion fails to identify a proper statutory basis for relief or the Court’s authority to impose sanctions against non-party former counsel in this proceeding.
Given the lack of clarity in the request and the procedural posture, the Court cannot properly adjudicate the motion on the papers.
The motion is DENIED without prejudice. Parties are ordered to appear to address the scope of the motion, the relief sought, and threshold procedural issues. LINE 5 25CV456266 Jung Woong Sur MOTION TO COMPEL v. Youngjoo Seung et al. Plaintiff’s motion for an order compelling Defendant to further produce responses to Request for Production of Documents, Set One, numbers 1 through 23and further responses to Special Interrogatories, Set One, numbers 1,3 through 21.
Notice is Proper. The Court has received no opposition from Defendant. “[T]he failure to file an opposition creates an inference that the motion is meritorious.” (Sexton v. Superior Court (1997) 58 Cal.App.4th 1403, 1410.) Good Cause Appearing, Plaintiff’s motion to compel is GRANTED.
Plaintiff to prepare the final proposed order, accompanied by the necessary Forms EFS-020, within 7 days of the date of the hearing.
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?”