Motion to Compel Answers to Special Interrogatories; Motion to Compel Production of Documents
# Case Name Tentative 1 Abinante vs. Kunzler Bean & Adamson, PC
2024-01423181 Motion to Compel Answers to Special Interrogatories
Motion to Compel Production of Documents
Defendants Kunzler Bean & Adamson, PC and Michael Penley’s Motions to Compel Plaintiff Matthew Abinante, DO’s Responses to Request for Production of Documents, Set One and Special Interrogatories, Set One are GRANTED.
Defendants served Dr. Abinante with their first set of Special Interrogatories and Request for Production on September 16, 2025. Dr. Abinante failed to provide any responses and has indicated he will not oppose the motions.
Accordingly, the motions are GRANTED. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.290, 2031.020.) Dr. Abinante is ordered to provide verified responses without objections to the outstanding discovery within 20 days of this hearing.
Defendants’ request for monetary sanctions is GRANTED in the amount of $880 (2 hrs at $220/hr x 2 motions) against Dr. Abinante and his counsel of record. Sanctions to be paid within 30 days.
2 Chao vs. Air Combat USA, Inc.
2022-01258475 Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel of Record
Off calendar. See minute order dated 5/19/26. 3 City of Fullerton vs. Air Combat USA, Inc.
2026-01548989 Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel of Record
Off calendar. See minute order dated 5/20/26. 4 Ho vs. Little Saigon Inn
2025-01512937 Demurrer to Complaint
Defendant Little Saigon Inn’s demurrer to the sole cause of action for premises liability brought by Cong Van Ho is sustained with leave to amend. Ho has not alleged sufficient facts showing Saigon owed him a duty to protect him from his alleged injuries. Ho is granted ten days leave to amend.
Defendant Saigon to give notice.
5 Jerisat vs. Young
Motion for Reclassification
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?”