Motion Types Legal Issues

What is a Motion to Compel Further Responses to Interrogatories?

Most Useful Motion to Compel Further Responses to Interrogatories Examples

Recent Examples of Motion to Compel Further Responses to Interrogatories

1-25 of 500 results

CLAIRE LEVINE VS SYLVESTER STEWART, ET AL.

...discovery and by not providing answers to legitimate interrogatories. The Court will allow Plaintiff to file a motion to compel further responses; if the Court finds in favor of Plaintiff on such a further motion, the Court will consider awarding plaintiff sanctions. Hopefully, the parties will be able to meet-and-confer to avoid the need for further motions on this issue. BACKGROUND: On February 26, 2019 Pl...

...and overruled the demurrer to the SAC for the abuse of process claim. Before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion to compel verified responses, or in the alternative, compel further responses, to special interrogatories set one. ANALYSIS: A. Relevant Law Code of Civil Procedure requires a response from the party to whom requests for production are propounded within 30 days after service of the requests. (Code Civ....

  • Hearing

    Feb 21, 2020

DEANNA AIVAZIAN VS. SARKIS TERSAKIAN ET AL

...Plaintiff: (1) a motion to compel initial responses to form interrogatories, set one (“FROG”), special interrogatories, set one (“SROG”), and requests for production of documents, set one (“RPD”); and (2) motion to deem the truth of matters specified in requests for admission, set one (“RFA”) admitted and conclusively established. On January 23, 2020, the Court denied Defendants’ “Ex Parte Application for an...

...Deed the Truth of Matters Admitted and Motion to Compel Response to Interrogatories and Request for Production”. The Court stated in its minute order that Plaintiff’s counsel represented that he provided responses to Defendants’ discovery requests. The Court’s minute order also reflected that Plaintiff’s counsel handed the discovery responses to defense counsel in open court. The Court encouraged defense counse...

  • Hearing

    Feb 21, 2020

CARRIEN QIAN HE, AN INDIVIDUAL VS JAY MIN CHEN, AN INDIVIDUAL, ET AL.

...DATE: Friday, February 21, 2020 NOTICE: OK RE: He v. Chen, et al. (19PSCV00181) ______________________________________________________________________________ Plaintiff’s MOTIONS (1) TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSES TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE; (2) TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSES TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS, SET ONE; (3) FOR RELEASE OF DOCUMENTS PURSUANT TO SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM. Responding Party: D...

...Responding Party: Defendant/Cross-Complainant, Jay Min Chen Tentative Ruling (1) The motion to compel further responses to special interrogatories is GRANTED. Defendant is ordered to serve verified further responses to Special Interrogatory Nos. 4 through 9, inclusive, within 20 days of this order. Plaintiff’s request for monetary sanctions is GRANTED in the amount of $960.00 against Defendant Jay Min Chen and hi...

  • Hearing

    Feb 21, 2020

LARRY SPITCAUFSKY, TRUSTEE OF THE LARRY SPITCAUFSKY FAMILY TRUST UTA 01/19/ 1988, ON BEHALF OF HIMSELF AND AS THE AUTHORIZED VS DAVID CHANG, ET AL.

...01/19/1988 (“Plaintiff”) filed a motion to compel responses from Defendants David Chang, California Owl, Inc., West Covina Wings, LLC (“Defendants”) for Form Interrogatories (“FROG”), set one. In the same motion, he also requests an order deeming the Requests for Admissions (“RFA”), set one, to be deemed admitted. On October 9, 2019, Plaintiff served on Defendants the discovery requests, such that responses ...

...then attempted to meet and confer with defense counsel via telephone, where defense counsel stated that he was having difficulty contacting his clients. Plaintiff states that he was not in receipt of responses by December 3, 2019, so his counsel sent a meet and confer letter to Defendants requesting responses by December 10, 2019. As of the filing of the motion on December 24, 2019, Plaintiff states that he...

  • Hearing

    Feb 21, 2020

WASHINGTON VS PETTY

...California Automobile Insurance Company’s unopposed Motion to Compel Verified Responses to Special Interrogatories is granted. Plaintiff Gillen Washington is ordered to serve verified responses to the special interrogatories, without objections, within 15 days. Defendant’s request for monetary sanctions against plaintiff Gillen Washington is granted in the amount of $844.00, payable within 30 days. Defendant is ordered to...

  • Hearing

    Feb 21, 2020

LESLIE BLAKENEY VS SERGIO GARCIA

Motion to Compel Responses to Form Interrogatories, Special Interrogatories, and Request for Production (All Set One) Having considered the moving and opposing papers, the Court rules as follows. No reply papers were filed. BACKGROUND On August 1, 2018, Plaintiff Leslie Bl...

...misrepresentation. On January 3, 2020, Defendants Sergio Garcia and Manuela T. Garcia filed a motion to compel Plaintiff to provide verified responses without objections to Form Interrogatories, Special Interrogatories, and Request for Production (All Set One) pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure sections 2030.290 and 2031.300. Trial is set for June 2, 2020. PARTIES’ REQUESTS Defendants Sergio Garcia an...

  • Hearing

    Feb 20, 2020

ARSHA CORPORATION, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION VS CEDARWOOD CAPITAL PARTNERS LA CIENGA, LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY

... RESPONSES TO INTERROGATORIES, REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION, REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION, DEPOSITION; SANCTIONS (CCP §§ 2030.290, 2031.300, 2033.380, 2025.450) TENTATIVE RULING: Plaintiff Arsha Corporation’s Motion For Order Compelling Defendant Cedarwood Capital Partners La Cienega, LLC To Respond to Form Interrogatories, Set One and Request for Sanctions is DENIED. THE HEARING ON THE REMAINING REQUESTS IN THE ...

... Compel Responses to Discovery Requests Improper Combination of Multiple Discovery Motions Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Discovery Responses attempts to combine multiple requests for relief into a single motion. The Motion moves for an order compelling Defendant to furnish responses to three separate discovery requests: (1) Form Interrogatories, Set One; (2) Special Interrogatories, Set One; and (3) Requests...

  • Hearing

    Feb 20, 2020

MARIA CANO VS GENERAL MOTORS, LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY

HEARING DATE: February 18, 2020 CASE NUMBER: 19STCV04011 CASE NAME: Maria Cano v. General Motors, LLC TRIAL DATE: March 24, 2020 MOTION: Motion to Compel Further Responses to Form Interrogatories MOVING PARTIES: Plaintiff, Maria Cano OPPOSING PARTY: Defendant, General Motors, LLC PROOF OF SERVICE: OK OPPOSITION: February 5, 2020 REPLY: February 11, 2020 TENTATIVE:...

...2020 TENTATIVE: Plaintiff’s motion to compel further responses to form interrogatories is GRANTED as to 1.1, 15.1 and 17.1 and otherwise denied. Plaintiff is to provide notice and GM is to provide further, verified responses within 20 days. MOTION: Motion to Compel Further Responses to Requests for Production MOVING PARTIES: Plaintiff, Maria Cano OPPOSING PARTY: Defendant, General Motors, LLC PROOF OF SERVICE: OK OPP...

  • Hearing

    Feb 20, 2020

VICTORINO CASTILLO VS GLORIA'S COUNTRY BUTCHER, ET AL.

MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSES TO FORM INTERROGATORIES (CCP § 2030.300) TENTATIVE RULING: Plaintiff Jose Manzo’s Motion to Compel Further Answers to Interrogatories is CONTINUED TO MARCH 9, 2020 at 10:30 a.m. in Department 25. ANALYSIS: Background & Discussion On May 29, 2019, Plaintiff Jose Manzo (“Plaintiff”) filed an action for damages for violations of the...

...Defendant and to verify the status of Defendant as the proper litigant being sued for March 2, 2020. (1/30/20 Minute Order.) On December 5, 2019, Plaintiff filed the instant Motion to Compel Defendant’s Further Answers to Interrogatories (the “Motion”). To date, no opposition or reply briefs have been filed. In light of the order to show cause scheduled for March 2, 2020, the hearing on the instant Motion i...

  • Hearing

    Feb 20, 2020

CASHCALL, INC. VS LIZETT IBARRA

...February 2020. Please specify the issue to be contested when calling the Court and Counsel. MOTION OF PLAINTIFF TO COMPEL DEFENDANT TO RESPOND TO FORM INTERROGATORIES (LIMITED CIVIL CASES), SET ONE; SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE; AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS, SET ONE I. Statement of Facts. Plaintiff filed this verified complaint on 12 March 2019 2019.17 This is an action for breach of contract and common...

...plaintiff served defendant with form interrogatories (limited civil cases), set one; special interrogatories, set one; requests for admissions, set one; and request for production of documents, set one. Responses were due on 8 November 2019. They have not been provided. The matter has a trial date of 4 May 2020. II. Analysis. Responses to interrogatories and request for production of documents are due within...

  • Hearing

    Feb 20, 2020

MARIA PINEDA VS N B & T INDUSTRIES, INC., A CORPORATION, ET AL.

Plaintiff’s motion to compel responses to form interrogatories, set two, and request for sanctions, is GRANTED. When a party to whom interrogatories are directed fails to respond, under CCP § 2030.290(b) a party propounding the interrogatories may move for an order compelling a response. A party who fails to provide a timely response waives any ob...

...any objection, including one based on privilege or work product. CCP § 2030.290(a). For a motion to compel initial responses, no meet and confer is required. All that needs to be shown is that a set of interrogatories was properly served on the opposing party, that the time to respond has expired, and that no response of any kind has been served. Leach v. Sup. Ct. (1980) 111 Cal.App.3d 902, 905-06. Here, as of the ...

  • Hearing

    Feb 20, 2020

MONICA MARIE DE LA TORRE, ET AL. VS MUOI THI HUA, ET AL.

[TENTATIVE] ORDER RE: DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO COMPEL PLAINTIFF KELLEY JEAN PHILLIPS’S RESPONSES TO DISCOVERY AND MONETARY SANCTIONS On May 23, 2019, Plaintiffs Monica Marie de la Torre and Kelley Jean Phillips (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Defendants Muoi Thi Hua and Binh Dao (collect...

...production of documents, and form interrogatories on Plaintiff. On November 13, 2019, Defendants sent a letter asking for the responses. Defendants received no responses. Defendants move to compel Plaintiff’s responses. Where a party fails to serve timely responses to discovery requests, the court may make an order compelling responses. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.290, 2031.300; Healthcare Consulting, Inc. v. Pacific...

  • Hearing

    Feb 20, 2020

IPFS CORP VS CENTERPOINTE INSURANCE

...defendants, Centerpointe Insurance Services Limited ("Centerpointe"), and Robert Farmer ("Farmer") (alternatively, "defendants"): (1) Motion to Compel Centerpointe's Further Responses to Form Interrogatories (Set No. 1), and for $2,520 in Monetary Sanctions (Opposed); (2) Motion to Compel Centerpointe's Further Responses to Requests for Admissions (Set No. 1), and for $2,625 in Monetar...

...(Opposed); (3) Motion to Compel Centerpointe's Further Responses to Special Interrogatories (Set No. 1), and for $2,905 in Monetary Sanctions (Opposed); and (4) Motion to Compel Centerpointe's Further Responses to Requests for Production (Set No. 1), and for $2,505 in Monetary Sanctions (Opposed) Timeliness The motions were brought within the time required by the Discovery Act. Mee...

  • Hearing

    Feb 20, 2020

IPFS CORP VS CENTERPOINTE INSURANCE

...defendants, Centerpointe Insurance Services Limited ("Centerpointe"), and Robert Farmer ("Farmer") (alternatively, "defendants"): (1) Motion to Compel Centerpointe's Further Responses to Form Interrogatories (Set No. 1), and for $2,520 in Monetary Sanctions (Opposed); (2) Motion to Compel Centerpointe's Further Responses to Requests for Admissions (Set No. 1), and for $2,625 in Monetar...

...(Opposed); (3) Motion to Compel Centerpointe's Further Responses to Special Interrogatories (Set No. 1), and for $2,905 in Monetary Sanctions (Opposed); and (4) Motion to Compel Centerpointe's Further Responses to Requests for Production (Set No. 1), and for $2,505 in Monetary Sanctions (Opposed) Timeliness The motions were brought within the time required by the Discovery Act. Mee...

  • Hearing

    Feb 20, 2020

IPFS CORP VS CENTERPOINTE INSURANCE

...defendants, Centerpointe Insurance Services Limited ("Centerpointe"), and Robert Farmer ("Farmer") (alternatively, "defendants"): (1) Motion to Compel Centerpointe's Further Responses to Form Interrogatories (Set No. 1), and for $2,520 in Monetary Sanctions (Opposed); (2) Motion to Compel Centerpointe's Further Responses to Requests for Admissions (Set No. 1), and for $2,625 in Monetar...

...(Opposed); (3) Motion to Compel Centerpointe's Further Responses to Special Interrogatories (Set No. 1), and for $2,905 in Monetary Sanctions (Opposed); and (4) Motion to Compel Centerpointe's Further Responses to Requests for Production (Set No. 1), and for $2,505 in Monetary Sanctions (Opposed) Timeliness The motions were brought within the time required by the Discovery Act. Mee...

  • Hearing

    Feb 20, 2020

IPFS CORP VS CENTERPOINTE INSURANCE

...defendants, Centerpointe Insurance Services Limited ("Centerpointe"), and Robert Farmer ("Farmer") (alternatively, "defendants"): (1) Motion to Compel Centerpointe's Further Responses to Form Interrogatories (Set No. 1), and for $2,520 in Monetary Sanctions (Opposed); (2) Motion to Compel Centerpointe's Further Responses to Requests for Admissions (Set No. 1), and for $2,625 in Monetar...

...(Opposed); (3) Motion to Compel Centerpointe's Further Responses to Special Interrogatories (Set No. 1), and for $2,905 in Monetary Sanctions (Opposed); and (4) Motion to Compel Centerpointe's Further Responses to Requests for Production (Set No. 1), and for $2,505 in Monetary Sanctions (Opposed) Timeliness The motions were brought within the time required by the Discovery Act. Mee...

  • Hearing

    Feb 20, 2020

IRMA MOJARRO ET AL VS CITY OF WHITTIER

...Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Further Responses to Request for Admissions (set one) is DENIED. II. Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Further Responses to Form Interrogatories (set two) is DENIED. III. Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Further Responses to Request for Production of Documents (set four) is DENIED. IV. Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Further Responses to Request for Production of Documents (set five) is DENIED...

...separate statement. The motions that require a separate statement include a motion: (1) To Compel further responses to requests for admission; (2) To compel further responses to interrogatories…; (5) To compel or quash the production of documents or tangible things at a deposition…. (7) For issue or evidentiary sanctions.” (CRC Rule 3.1345(a).) “A separate statement is a separate document filed and served w...

  • Hearing

    Feb 20, 2020

CHARLES KUTA V. COLORTOKENS, INC.

...when Kuta separated from employment with ColorTokens. Defendant ColorTokens served several discovery requests on Kuta and has filed the instant motion to compel further discovery responses. The requested responses are targeted at discovering information regarding Linkaj, a competing company ColorTokens alleges Kuta and several of his coworkers created while they were still employed with ColorTokens. Kuta oppose...

...and communications that relate to, or otherwise mention, the investor demos and presentations for Linkaj that you referenced during your July 30, 2019 deposition. Defendant ColorTokens requests further responses to all of the requests for production of documents listed above. A motion for an order compelling further responses “shall set forth specific facts showing good cause justifying the discovery sought b...

  • Hearing

    Feb 20, 2020

DOUGLAS HART VS ALTA VISTA GARDENS, INC., ET AL.

Motion for Sanctions Having considered the moving, opposing, and reply papers, the Court rules as follows. BACKGROUND On June 10, 2019, Plaintiff Douglas Hart (“Plaintiff”) filed a complaint against Defen...

...Plaintiff’s motions to compel Defendant/Cross-Defendant Alta Vista Gardens, Inc.’s responses to Form Interrogatories and Request for Production (Both Set One). On December 12, 2019, Plaintiff filed a motion for issue or evidentiary sanctions pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 2023.030. Trial is set for December 7, 2020. PARTY’S REQUESTS Plaintiff asks the Court to order either: (1)...

  • Hearing

    Feb 20, 2020

RAINES VS. CASTANEDA

... Compel Physical/Mental Examination filed by Defendants Gabriel C Luna and Jesus A-Luna Castaneda: MOTION NO. 1: Defendants Gabriel Luna dba GL Services, and Jesus A. Luna Castaneda’s motion for an order to compel plaintiff Luis E. Alvarez to submit to an Independent Medical Examination (“IME”) with Orthopedic surgeon, Dr. Michael P. Weinstein, M.D. is GRANTED. Defendant has an unqualified right to demand one p...

...place on December 17, 2019 with Dr. Weinstein. (Chang Dec., ¶ 6, Ex. C). Plaintiff failed to appear for this IME as well. (Chang Dec., ¶ 7.) Plaintiff has not opposed the motion. Accordingly, Defendant’s motion is GRANTED. Plaintiff shall comply with Defendant’s demand to submit to a medical examination by orthopedist Michael P. Weinstein, M.D., at 360 San Miguel Dr. #701, Newport Beach, California 92660. Th...

  • Hearing

    Feb 20, 2020

MAURO GASPAR CAMPOS ET AL VS LONG BEACH MEMORIAL CENTER ET A

...testified at his deposition. Plaintiffs’ counsel asked Defendant certain questions that Defendant upon instruction by his counsel did not answer. On January 17, 2020, Plaintiffs filed this motion seeking to compel Defendant to answer certain questions that refused to answer at his deposition along with reasonable follow-up questions. Plaintiffs also seek $7,831.20 in monetary sanctions. On February 5, 2020, De...

...Plaintiffs. On February 11, 2020, Plaintiffs filed their reply. MEET AND CONFER Defendant argues that that Court should deny Plaintiffs’ motion because of insufficient meet and confer efforts. A motion to compel answers for depositions questions must be accompanied by a declaration stating facts showing “a reasonable and good faith attempt at an informal resolution of each issue presented by the motion.” (Cod...

  • Hearing

    Feb 20, 2020

VERNON ALEXANDER ROSADO, ET AL. VS LQK CORPORATION

MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO FORM INTERROGATORIES, SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION (CCP §§ 2030.290; 2031.300) TENTATIVE RULING: Defendant LQK Corporation’s nine Motions to Compel Discovery are GRANTED. Plaintiffs are ordered to serve verified response...

...property damage. On June 30, 2019, Defendant filed an Answer. On January 24, 2020, Defendant filed the following nine motions: (1) Motion to Compel Plaintiff Alexander Protective Services’ Responses to Form Interrogatories, Set One, and Request for Monetary and Evidentiary Sanctions; (2) Motion to Compel Plaintiff Alexander Protective Services’ Responses to Special Interrogatories, Set One, and Request for Monetary and ...

  • Hearing

    Feb 19, 2020

OSCAR RIDEAU VS SMART & FINAL LLC ET AL

... motion to compel further discovery responses to Plaintiff’s form interrogatories, set one is DENIED. No sanctions. Code of Civil Procedure section 2030.300 allows a party to file a motion compelling further answers to interrogatories if it finds that the response is inadequate, incomplete, or evasive, or an objection in the response is without merit or too general. The motion shall be accompanied with a ...

...to file a motion to compel further responses. (Clancey Decl., ¶ 9.) Thus, the court Cannot find that either party acted in good faith. Nonetheless, the Court is in receipt of Plaintiff’s supplemental responses to Defendant’s Form Interrogatories and finds that the responses are in substantial compliance. It is uncertain as to what basis Defendant seeks further responses when Plaintiffs already answered thes...

  • Hearing

    Feb 19, 2020

OSCAR RIDEAU VS SMART & FINAL LLC ET AL

...Stores, LLC’s motion to compel further discovery responses to Plaintiff’s form interrogatories, set one, is DENIED. No sanctions. Code of Civil Procedure section 2030.300 allows a party to file a motion compelling further answers to interrogatories if it finds that the response is inadequate, incomplete, or evasive, or an objection in the response is without merit or too general. The motion shall be accompa...

  • Hearing

    Feb 19, 2020

AURORA LEMERE, ET AL. VS LISA JEWETT, ET AL.

MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSES AND REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS (CCP § 2030.200) TENTATIVE RULING: Plaintiffs Aurora LeMere and Douglas B. Spoors’ Motions to Compel Further Responses are CONTINUED TO APRIL 30. 2020 at 10:30 a.m. in Department 25, SPRING STREET COURTHOUSE.. At least 16 court days before the next scheduled hearing, Plaintiffs must file and serve s...

...Sanctions, (2) Motion to Compel Further Responses from Lisa Jewett to Special Interrogatories, Set One, and Request for Sanctions, and (3) Motion to Compel Further Responses from Victoria Elliot to Special Interrogatories, Set One, and Request for Sanctions (collectively, the “Motions”). To date, no opposition or reply briefs have been filed. On December 16, 2019, the Court granted Defendant’s Motion for Change of Ven...

  • Hearing

    Feb 19, 2020

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 20     last » 

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.