DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
PR0001056·marin·Probate·Probate
Hearing 3 months agoThe motion is ordered OFF CALENDAR.

IN THE MATTER OF FABIO ANGIOLI CORTARA

Motion to Compel Further Responses to Requests for Production; Motion for Monetary Sanctions

Hearing date
May 28, 2026
Department
C
Prevailing
N/A
Appearance
Not required

Motion type

Browse all Motion to Compel Further Responses rulings statewide →

Parties

DefendantNicole M. Angiuli
PlaintiffSalvatore Cortara

Ruling

PR0001056 IN THE MATTER OF FABIO ANGIOLI CORTARA

Motion to Compel Plaintiff Nicole M. Angiuli, Administrator of the Estate of Fabio Angiuli Cortara to Provide Further Responses to Requests for Production of Documents, and for Award of Monetary Sanctions, filed by Salvatore Cortara on 3/18/26.

Ruling. Pursuant to Marin County Rule, Probate 6.4 and Civil 2.13B, on April 24, 2026, this Court appointed Janet Lee (Jayli) Miller to preside as Discovery Facilitator for Salvatore Cortara’s Motion to Compel Nicole M. Angiuli, Administrator of the Estate of Fabio Angiuli Cortara to Provide Further Responses to Requests for Production of Documents, and for Award of Monetary Sanctions.

The Court has not received a Declaration of Non-Resolution from either party, in particular the moving party, five court days prior to the hearing on the motion set for May 28, 2026, as required by MCR Civ 2.13H. The Court reminds the parties that compliance with MCR Civ 2.13H not only includes the timely filing of the Declaration of Non-Resolution by each party five court days prior to the hearing, but also requires that “[t]he Declaration shall not exceed three pages and shall briefly summarize the remaining disputed issues and each party’s contentions.” (MCR Civ 2.13H(1), emphasis added.)

The Court concludes and expects that this discovery matter is being resolved by the facilitator. The motion is therefore ordered OFF CALENDAR. (MCR Civ 2.13H(2).) Should the parties fail to reach resolution through the facilitator, either party may request (by ex parte application) that the Court reset the motion for an expedited hearing.

Cited authorities

Extracting citations from the ruling text…
Verify against the source PDF — LLM extraction may miss or mis-normalize citations.

Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities

Ask about this ruling

Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”

Answers reference only this ruling's text. Not legal advice — always verify against the source PDF.

Find similar rulings

Source

Share