Reicherts vs. Farris

Plaintiff contends that evidence of Defendants’ financial condition is essential to enable the court to determine an appropriate punitive damages award at the default judgment or prove-up hearing. Without access to financial information, the Court would be required to speculate as to Defendants’ net worth, frustrating the deterrent and punitive purposes of Civil Code section 3294.

The motion has not been opposed by Defendants, and they have failed to present evidence disputing that it is likely Plaintiff will prevail on its claim for punitive damages.

Accordingly, the motion is GRANTED. Plaintiff is permitted to engage in pretrial discovery of Defendants’ financial condition pursuant to Civil Code § 3295(c).

The OSC re: Dismissal hearings are continued to December 17, 2026, at 9:30 a.m. in Department C12.

Plaintiff Moving Party to give notice.

3. Reicherts vs. Farris

25-01479895

1. Motion for Sanctions 2. Motion to Compel Answers to Form Interrogatories 3. Motion to Compel Answers to Special Interrogatories 4. Motion to Compel Production 5. Motion to Compel Response to Requests for Admissions

ALL MOTIONS CONTINUED. See ROA 133

4. Cho vs. American Honda Motor Co., Inc.

25-01452448

Motion for Discovery Sanctions

Plaintiff’s Continued Motion for Discovery Sanctions

Plaintiff Kyung Ho Cho’s Motion for Discovery Sanctions was originally heard on 5/1/26. On the day before the original hearing date, Defendant made some effort to comply with the court’s 10/3/25 order compelling Defendant to provide further responses to Plaintiff’s Request for Production of Documents, request Nos. 7, 8, 17, 19, 20, 41, 52, 53, 54, 56, and 57.

The Court continued this hearing, as it appeared the parties could possibly resolve this dispute if given further opportunity to meet and confer.

To the Court’s disappointment, and based upon Plaintiff’s meet and confer statement, filed on 5/29/26, it appears that nothing has been