DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
23CV005500·sacramento·Civil·Insurance Litigation
Hearing 3 months agoDENIED

LIBERTY MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, A CORPORATION vs BROWN, et al.

Motion to Compel Answers to Form Interrogatories

Hearing date
May 28, 2026
Department
16C
Judge
Prevailing
Defendant
Appearance
Not required

Motion type

Browse all Motion to Compel Further Responses rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffLIBERTY MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY
DefendantEric Brown

Attorneys

Brian Tapperfor Plaintiff

Ruling

23CV005500: LIBERTY MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, A CORPORATION vs BROWN, et al. 05/28/2026 Hearing on Motion to Compel Answers to Form Interrogatories in Department 16C

Tentative Ruling

NOTICE:

Please take notice, Department 54 has moved to Department 16C at the Tani G. Cantil-Sakauye Courthouse. The new courthouse is located at 500 G Street, Sacramento, CA 95814.

TENTATIVE RULING:

Plaintiff Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance Company’s (“Plaintiff”) motion to compel Defendant Eric Brown’s (“Defendant”) initial responses to Defendant’s form interrogatories, set one, is UNOPPOSED and DENIED.

The Clerk entered default against Defendant at the request of Plaintiff on October 17, 2023. Plaintiff propounded its form interrogatories on January 22, 2024. (Declaration of Brian Tapper, ¶ 2, Ex. A.) Plaintiff provides the Court with no legal authority indicating that a defaulted party, who is “out of court” and unable to affirmatively participate in the case, is nevertheless subject to discovery propounded by an opponent. It appears that the law is to the contrary. (Devlin v. Kearny Mesa AMC/Jeep/Renault, Inc. (1984) 155 Cal.App.3d 381, 384-386 [defaulted defendant was properly denied the right to take deposition of plaintiff’s witness].)

Even if Defendant were subject to discovery, this motion would still be denied because Plaintiff did not properly meet and confer with him before filing this motion.

Plaintiff’s request for monetary sanctions pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure sections 2030.290 and 2023.030 is denied.

This minute order is effective immediately. No formal order or other notice is required. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1019.5; Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1312.)

NOTICE:

Consistent with Local Rule 1.06(B), any party requesting oral argument on any matter on this calendar must comply with the following procedure:

23CV005500: LIBERTY MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, A CORPORATION vs BROWN, et al. 05/28/2026 Hearing on Motion to Compel Answers to Form Interrogatories in Department 16C

To request limited oral argument, on any matter on this calendar, you must call the Law and Motion Oral Argument Request Line at (916) 874-2615 by 4:00 p.m. the Court day before the hearing and advise opposing counsel. At the time of requesting oral argument, the requesting party shall leave a voice mail message: a) identifying themselves as the party requesting oral argument; b) indicating the specific matter/motion for which they are requesting oral argument; and c) confirming that it has notified the opposing party of its intention to appear and that opposing party may appear via Zoom using the Zoom link and Meeting ID indicated below. If no request for oral argument is made, the tentative ruling becomes the final order of the Court.

Unless ordered to appear in person by the Court, parties may appear remotely either telephonically or by video conference via the Zoom video/audio conference platform with notice to the Court and all other parties in accordance with Code of Civil Procedure §367.75. Although remote participation is not required, the Court will presume all parties are appearing remotely for non-evidentiary civil hearings.

The Department 16C Zoom Link is https://saccourt-ca-gov.zoomgov.com/j/16030877014 and the Zoom Meeting ID is 160 3087 7014. To appear on Zoom telephonically, call (833) 568-8864 and enter the Zoom Meeting ID referenced above. NO COURTCALL APPEARANCES WILL BE ACCEPTED.

Parties requesting services of a court reporter will need to arrange for private court reporter services at their own expense, pursuant to Government code §68086 and California Rules of Court, Rule 2.956. Requirements for requesting a court reporter are listed in the Policy for Official Reporter Pro Tempore available on the Sacramento Superior Court website at https://www.saccourt.ca.gov/court-reporters/docs/crtrp-6a.pdf. Parties may contact Court- Approved Official Reporters Pro Tempore by utilizing the list of Court Approved Official Reporters Pro Tempore available at https://www.saccourt.ca.gov/court-reporters/docs/crtrp- 13.pdf.

A Stipulation and Appointment of Official Reporter Pro Tempore (CV/E-206) is required to be signed by each party, the private court reporter, and the Judge prior to the hearing, if not using a reporter from the Court’s Approved Official Reporter Pro Tempore list.

Once the form is signed it must be filed with the clerk. If a litigant has been granted a fee waiver and requests a court reporter, the party must submit a Request for Court Reporter by a Party with a Fee Waiver (CV/E-211) and it must be filed with the clerk at least 10 days prior to the hearing or at the time the proceeding is scheduled if less than 10 days away. Once approved, the clerk will forward the form to the Court Reporter’s Office and an official reporter will be provided.

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