Informal resolution of discovery disputes is a centerpiece of California civil practice, requiring civil litigants to make “a serious attempt to obtain an informal resolution of each issue.” (Code of Civ. Proc., § 2025(o).)
This rule is designed “to encourage the parties to work out their differences informally so as to avoid the necessity for a formal order.” (McElhaney v. Cessna Aircraft Co. (1982) 134 Cal.App.3d 285, 289, 184 Cal.Rptr. 547.) “This, in turn, will lessen the burden on the court and reduce the unnecessary expenditure of resources by litigants through promotion of informal, extrajudicial resolution of discovery disputes.” (Townsend v. Super. Ct. (1998) 61 Cal.App.4th 1431, 1435.)
Legal Standard
The Legislature passed AB 383, which adds Section 2016.080 to the Code of Civil Procedure, effective January 1, 2018. According to this section, “[i]f an informal resolution is not reached by the parties, as described in Section 2016.040, the court may conduct an informal discovery conference upon request by a party or on the court's own motion for the purpose of discussing discovery matters in dispute between the parties.” (Code of Civ. Proc., § 2016.080(a).)
A determination of whether an attempt at informal resolution is adequate involves the exercise of discretion. (Stewart v. Colonial Western Agency, Inc. (2001) 87 Cal.App.4th 1006, 1012-1013.) Among the factors the court should consider are the history of the litigation, the nature of the interaction between counsel, the nature of the issues, the type and scope of discovery requested, and the prospects for success. (Id.) A trial judge's perceptions on such matters, inherently factual in nature at least in part, must not be lightly disturbed. (Id.)
Timelines
“If an informal discovery conference is granted or ordered, the court may toll the deadline for filing a discovery motion.” (Code of Civ. Proc., § 2016.080(c)(2).)
Useful Resources for Informal Discovery Conference
KAREN THELIN, Plaintiff(s), vs. LYNN SHARON GILGER, ET AL., Defendant(s).
CASE NO: BC659400
[TENTATIVE] ORDER DENYING MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSES
Dept. 3
10:00 a.m.
January 18, 2019
Plaintiff propounded supplemental interrogatories and supplemental RPDs on Defendant on 8/07/18. Defendant served responses on 9/28/18. Plaintiff, believing the response to RPD 9 was insufficient, schedule...
..nses are served. CCP §2031.310. Plaintiff erroneously then concludes that the motion is timely because the motion is filed within ten days after the informal discovery conference. Plaintiff cites no authority for the position that an informal discovery conference extends the statutory time to file a motion to compel further responses.
Indeed, when the Court drafted its informal discovery confer...
AMENDED The Court will hear from counsel. The Court intends to adopt the following rule: The Court orders the parties to comply with an informal Pretrial Discovery Conference. A. Except for motions to compel the deposition of a duly noticed party or subpoenaed person(s) who have not timely served an objection pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 2025.410 or otherwise obtained the consent of...
..has either been denied and permission to file the motion is expressly granted via court order or the discovery dispute has not been resolved as a consequence of such a conference and permission to file the motion is expressly granted after the conference. (1) Any request for a Pretrial Discovery Conference must be filed with the Clerk's Office, include a brief summary of the dispute, and must be...
Motion to Compel Deposition
Having considered the moving, opposing, and reply papers, the Court rules as follows.
BACKGROUND
On October 31, 2018, Plaintiff Juana Carillo (“Plaintiff”) filed a complaint against Defendants Kohl’s Department Stores, Inc. and Michael Jaime alleging negligence and premises liability for a trip-and-fall that occurred on December 11, 2016.
On August 5, 2019, the Cour...
..o provide further testimony to questions asked during Plaintiff’s July 9, 2019 and July 10, 2019 depositions.
Moving Defendant also asks the Court to impose $3,560.00 in monetary sanctions against Plaintiff for her abuse of the discovery process.
LEGAL STANDARD
California Code of Civil Procedure section 2025.480, subdivision (a) states: “If a deponent fails to answer any question . . . the part...
scott patrick ludwig, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. general motors, llc, et al., Defendants.
Case No.: BC 705102
Hearing Date: May 10, 2019
Hearing Time: 8:30 a.m.
ORDER RE:
PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSES TO PLAINTIFFS’ REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS
The motion by Plaintiffs Scott Patrick Ludwig and Heather Ludwig (jointly, “Plaintiffs”) to compel further responses to Plaintif...
..y a party or on the court's own motion for the purpose of discussing discovery matters in dispute between the parties.” Pursuant to that Section, and the Court’s power to “amend and control its process and orders so as to make them conform to law and justice” pursuant to CCP § 128(a)(8), the Court orders the parties in this case to participate in an Informal Discovery Conference (“IDC”).
Lead or...
greg williams vs. bmw of north america, llc ; BC668638, January 17, 2018
[Tentative] Order RE: PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO COMPEL SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSES TO REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS
Plaintiff GREG WILLIAMS’S motion to compel Defendant BMW OF NORTH AMERICA, LLC to provide supplemental responses to Requests for Production of Documents is CONTINUED to allow the parties to participate in an Infor...
..olution is not reached by the parties, as described in Section 2016.040, the court may conduct an informal discovery conference upon request by a party or on the court's own motion for the purpose of discussing discovery matters in dispute between the parties.” Pursuant to that Section and the Court’s power to “amend and control its process and orders so as to make them conform to law and justic...
Tentative Ruling on Motions to (1) Compel Responses to Interrogatories and Document Demand; and (2) Compel Deposition in San Diego
Kairis v. Jarrous, Case No. 2017-26445
March 15, 2019, 1:30 p.m., Dept. 72
1. Overview and Procedural Posture.
This is a personal injury case which arose out of an accident on July 20, 2015 on Balboa Ave. in San Diego. The Judicial Council form complaint was filed...
..roached the court for a trial continuance to accommodate a very experienced expert witness (Dr. Vance). ROA 47-48. The court reluctantly granted this request, resulting in a new trial date of March 8, 2019. ROA 54-56. Obviously this revised plan for resolution of the case has not borne fruit. Another ex parte application came in December, 2018. ROA 60-61. Defendant could not get plaintiff to come...
