Motion to Compel Respondent's Production of Documents; Request for Sanctions
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO 24PR002924: MOHAMMAD ZAMIRI LIVING TRUST 06/03/2026 Hearing on Motion - Other Motion to Compel Respondent's Production of Documents in Department 126
Tentative Ruling TENTATIVE RULING NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION OF FARAH ZAMIRI TO COMPEL RESPONDENTS PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS; AND REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS
Filed: 4/8/2026
Re: Mohammad Zamiri Living Trust, dated July 19, 2022
Moving Party: Farah Zamiri, Co-Trustee Attorney: Stephanie Steevie, Downey Brand, (916) 444-1000
Responding Party: Azar Ghafouri Zamiri, Respondent Attorney: Daniel A. Near, (916) 987-0808
NOTICE: Pursuant to Local Rule 1.06 (A), the court will make a tentative ruling on the merits of this matter by 2:00 p.m., the court day before the hearing. The complete text of the tentative ruling may be downloaded off the courts website. If the party does not have online access, they may call the dedicated phone number for the Probate Department at (916) 875-2526 between the hours of 2:00 p.m. and 4:00 p.m. on the court day before the hearing and receive the tentative ruling. If you do not call the court and the opposing party by 4:00 p.m. the court day before the hearing, no hearing will be held.
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 126 Zoom Link is https://saccourt-cagov.zoomgov.com/my/sscdept126 and the Zoom Meeting ID is 160 5926 9604. 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-
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?”
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO 24PR002924: MOHAMMAD ZAMIRI LIVING TRUST 06/03/2026 Hearing on Motion - Other Motion to Compel Respondent's Production of Documents in Department 126
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 Courts 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 Reporters Office and an official reporter will be provided.
TENTATIVE RULING On the Courts own motion, Movant and Co-Trustee Farah Zamiris (Co-Trustee) motion to compel Respondent Azar Ghafouri Zamiris (Respondent) production of documents is continued as follows.
This is a trust dispute between Co-Trustee and Respondent, who is the surviving spouse of decedent Mohammad Zamiri. Co-Trustee is also acting as agent for Mansooreh Zamiri, pursuant to a Durable Power of Attorney. Co-Trustee served written discovery on Respondent on January 16, 2026. (Memorandum of Points and Authorities [MPA], 2:15-20.) Responses to written discovery are due within 30 days of service. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.250(a).) Because the written discovery was served by mail, Co-Trustee indicates the responses were due no later than February 20, 2026. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1031(a).) Co-Trustees request for production sets an inspection time for February 20, 2026, at 10:00 a.m. (Declaration of Stephanie Steevie [Steevie Decl.], Exhibit 1.)
Co-Trustee indicates Respondent failed to permit inspection of all responsive documents and seeks sanctions totaling $4,835. In opposition, Respondent indicates responses were provided by mail on February 20, 2026, and that Respondent objected to the demands on the grounds that it did not specify a reasonable time or place for the inspection of documents. (Declaration of Dan Near [Near Decl.], Exhibit A.)
Despite this objection, Respondent, through counsel, allegedly attempted to provide the responsive documents at the specified time and location, and was allegedly was denied access to the office of Co-Trustees counsel. (Near Decl., Exhibit B.) Respondent indicates Co-Trustee did not respond to a letter detailing these efforts. (Near Decl., Exhibit ¶¶ 5-6.) This is at odds with Co-Trustees allegations that numerous communications were attempted to resolve the issue. (Steevie Decl., ¶¶ 6-8.)
Counsel are reminded that this Court does not have the resources to resolve every discovery
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO 24PR002924: MOHAMMAD ZAMIRI LIVING TRUST 06/03/2026 Hearing on Motion - Other Motion to Compel Respondent's Production of Documents in Department 126
issue that could have and should have been resolved informally. (See Young v. Rosenthal (1989) 212 Cal.App.3d 96, 117 [The very purpose of an order to meet and confer is to obtain a negotiated resolution of a discovery dispute without having to expend judicial time to sort out which party is correct and what relief should be granted. What the court seeks is an agreement by the parties which resolves the dispute].)
Having reviewed the moving and opposing papers, and the disputed discovery requests, it is apparent to the Court that counsel must resume the meet-and-confer process in good faith before drawing upon the Courts limited resources. Counsel for the parties are thus ordered to resume the meet-and-confer process in order to resolve or substantially narrow their discovery dispute.
On the Courts own motion, the motion to compel production of documents is continued to July 1, 2026 in Department 126 at 3:00 p.m. The parties may file supplemental meet and confer declarations no later than June 17, 2026.
The Court notes the request to continue trial filed on May 4, 2026 was granted on May 12, 2026. The parties were admonished for concerns about professionalism and are again reminded of their duty of professionalism when conducting further meet and confer efforts.
This minute order is effective immediately. No formal order or other notice is required. (Code Civ. Proc. §1019.5; CRC, Rule 3.1312.)