Motion to Compel Further Responses to Special Interrogatories

Useful Rulings on Motion to Compel Further Responses to Special Interrogatories

Recent Rulings on Motion to Compel Further Responses to Special Interrogatories

TYBRITANY JONES THOMAS ET AL VS CITY OF SANTA MONICA ET AL

KIDANE’S MOTION TO COMPEL PLAINTIFF SHANELL THOMAS’ RESPONSES TO REQUEST FOR PRODUTION OF DOCUMENTS (SET ONE) (2) DEFENDANT ABSADI T. KIDANE’S MOTION TO TO COMPEL PLAINTIFF SHANELL THOMAS’ RESPONSES TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES (SET ONE). (3) Defendant Absadi T Kidane’s “Motion Deeming Admitted Request for Admission Set One ET ONE). MOVING PARTY: Defendant ABSADI T. KIDANE RESP.

  • Hearing

    Oct 22, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

  • Judge

    H. Jay Ford

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

WESTLAKE SERVICES LLC VS US NISSI AUTO SALES LLC, A LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, ET AL.

MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO INTERROGATORIES; (CCP § 2030.290) TENTATIVE RULING: Plaintiff Westlake Services, LLC’s Motion to Compel Responses to Special Interrogatories and Request for Production, to Deem Requests for Admission Admitted, and Request for Monetary Sanctions is GRANTED. DEFENDANT LOPEZ IS TO SERVE VERIFIED RESPONSES WITHOUT OBJECTION TO THE SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES AND REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION WITHIN 20 DAYS’ SERVICE OF THIS ORDER.

  • Hearing

    Oct 21, 2020

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

POPPINGTON, LLC, ET AL. VS ENTERTAINMENT ONE REALITY PRODUCTIONS, INC, ET AL.

.: 20STCV01961 Hearing Date: October 21, 2020 [TENTATIVE] order RE: (1) Motion to compel responses to special interrogatories, set one (2) motion to deem admitted matters specified in requests for admission, set one (3) motions to compel plaintiffs’ depositions Background Plaintiffs Poppington, LLC (Poppington) and Damon Dash (Dash) (collectively, Plaintiffs) commenced this action against Defendants Entertainment One Reality Productions, Inc.

  • Hearing

    Oct 21, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

JOSE ESTRADA GUZMAN VS SAM SOLAKYAN

On June 8, 2020, Defendant filed motions to compel responses 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. On June 9, 2020, the Court scheduled Defendant’s discovery motions to be heard on October 21, 2020. Trial is scheduled for May 20, 2021.

  • Hearing

    Oct 21, 2020

WATKINS V. HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN

Defendant’s (Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian) unopposed Motion to Compel Plaintiff’s Responses to Special Interrogatories, Set Two (Motion), filed on 8-14-20 under ROA No. 58, is GRANTED. Code of Civil Procedure section 2030.290 states, in part, “If a party to whom interrogatories are directed fails to serve a timely response, the following rules apply: . . . [¶] (b) The party propounding the interrogatories may move for an order compelling response to the interrogatories.”

  • Hearing

    Oct 20, 2020

TECHNOLOGY INSURANCE COMPANY INC. VS 2 U TURN RESTAURANT LLC, ET AL.

The Code of Civil Procedure makes clear a propounding party is entitled to file a motion to compel responses, without meeting and conferring, and to obtain monetary sanctions if the responding party fails to file a timely response. Code Civ. Proc. §§ 2030.290, 2031.300. Plaintiff does not present any argument as to why it failed to serve timely responses.

  • Hearing

    Oct 20, 2020

JERON GREEN, SR, ET AL. VS AD ASTRA INVESTMENTS, LLC

The motions seek the following: To deem RFAs, set one, propounded on Jeron Green admitted; To compel Plaintiff, Tinne Smith to respond to RPDs, set one; To compel Plaintiff, Jeron Green to respond to RPDs, set one; To compel Plaintiff, Tinne Smith to respond to form interrogatories, set one; To compel Plaintiff, Jeron Green to respond to form interrogatories, set one; To compel Plaintiff, Jeron Green to respond to special interrogatories, set one; To compel Plaintiff, Tinne Smith to respond to special

  • Hearing

    Oct 20, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Landlord Tenant

DENISE HERD, ET AL. VS RAZ CAPITAL INVESTMENT, LLC, ET AL.

Plaintiff Potter is ordered to serve answers to all of the interrogatories in Defendant Raz’s Form Interrogatories (Set One) without objections, except for interrogatory numbers 12.2 and 12.7, within twenty days of this ruling. The motion to compel responses to Special Interrogatories (Set One) is GRANTED. Plaintiff Potter is also ordered to serve answers to all of the interrogatories in Defendant Raz’s Special Interrogatories (Set One) without objections within twenty days of this ruling.

  • Hearing

    Oct 20, 2020

TYBRITANY JONES THOMAS ET AL VS CITY OF SANTA MONICA ET AL

.: BC691476 (consolidated with BC720243) Complaint Filed: 1-26-18 Hearing Date: 10-20-2020 SUBJECT: (1) MOTION TO COMPEL PLAINTIFF SHANELL THOMAS’ RESPONSES TO REQUEST FOR PRODUTION OF DOCUMENTS (SET ONE) (2) MOTION TO TO COMPEL PLAINTIFF SHANELL THOMAS’ RESPONSES TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES (SET ONE). MOVING PARTY: Defendant City of Santa Monica RESP.

  • Hearing

    Oct 20, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

  • Judge

    H. Jay Ford

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

MAC CAPRINI VS KIM SUKHEE

On June 4, 2020, Defendant filed motions to compel Plaintiff’s responses 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. Also on June 4, 2020, Defendant filed a motion to deem the matters in Request for Admissions (Set One) as true against Plaintiff pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 2033.280.

  • Hearing

    Oct 20, 2020

ORR VS CONTRADO

Plaintiff Michael Orr is ordered to provide verified responses to the Form Interrogatories, Special Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents pursuant to CCP §§ 2030.290(b) and 2031.300(b). By failing to respond to the interrogatories and inspection demand in a timely fashion, plaintiff Michael Orr has waived the right to assert objections pursuant to CCP §§ 2030.290(a) and 2031.300(a). Plaintiff Michael Orr's verified responses must be sent to Attorney Meredith P.

  • Hearing

    Oct 20, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Auto

GUADALUPE DOMINGUEZ, ET AL. VS HUNGI MA, ET AL.

On September 3, 2020, Defendant Ma filed motions to compel responses to Special Interrogatories and Requests for Production (All Set One) pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure sections 2030.290 and 2031.300. Trial is set for January 29, 2021. PARTY’S REQUEST Defendant Ma asks the Court to compel Plaintiffs to serve verified responses without objections to Special Interrogatories and Requests for Production (All Set One) within ten days of the hearing on these motions.

  • Hearing

    Oct 20, 2020

ROBBI AARON VS ESTRELLA, INC,, ET AL.

Plaintiff Aaron’s motion for orders 1) compelling Defendant to provide further answers to special interrogatories set no. one; and 2) imposing a monetary sanction is GRANTED. II. Plaintiff Aaron’s motion for orders 1) compelling Defendant to provide further answers to special interrogatories set no. one; and 2) imposing a monetary sanction is GRANTED. Defendant is ordered to serve further responses within 15 days.

  • Hearing

    Oct 20, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

  • Judge

    Lori Ann Fournier or Olivia Rosales

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

SULAIMAN MUNNEE VS NITA R METZ

.: 19STCV45194 Hearing Date: October 20, 2020 [TENTATIVE] order RE: motions to compel discovery responses Defendant Sulaiman Munnee (“Defendant”) moves to compel responses from Plaintiff Nita R. Metz (“Plaintiff”) to: (1) Request for Production of Documents, Set One (“RPD”); (2) Form Interrogatories, Set One (“FROG”); and (3) Special Interrogatories, Set One (“SROG”). Defendant served the written discovery on Plaintiff by mail on January 29, 2020. Plaintiff’s responses were thus due by March 4, 2020.

  • Hearing

    Oct 20, 2020

CARMEN TAYLOR-JONES, ET AL. VS JASMINE PIMENTEL, ET AL.

MTA moves to compel initial responses its discovery requests, which were propounded to each plaintiff: Special interrogatories, set one; Form interrogatories, sets one and two; Requests for production, set one; and Requests for admission, set one. The motions are unopposed. For the reasons set forth below, the Court grants the motions. Standard Interrogatories When a party fails to respond to propounded interrogatories the propounding party may move for an order compelling a response.

  • Hearing

    Oct 20, 2020

  • Judge

    Maurice A. Leiter or Salvatore Sirna

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

MASSE VS. FRUEHAN

Motion to Compel Responses to Special Interrogatories 2. Motion to Compel Responses to Requests for Production of Documents/Inspection Demands 3. Motion to Deem Admitted the Truth of Matters Specified in Requests for Admissions Moving Party (MP): Defendants Joel Fruehan and Annette Fruehan Responding Party (RP): Plaintiffs Eugene Masse and Amy Vrooman, in pro per Ruling Motion 1: Defendants’ unopposed motion to compel responses to Special Interrogatories, Set One is granted.

  • Hearing

    Oct 19, 2020

ALRABAH VS. UBER, INC

Motion to Compel Responses to Special Interrogatories Moving Party: Defendant Uber Technologies, Inc. (esa Uber, Inc.) Responding Party: None Ruling: Defendant’s Motion to Compel Responses from Plaintiff Sarah Alrabah to Special Interrogatories (Set One) is GRANTED. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.290(b).) If a party fails to serve a timely response to discovery requests, then by operation of law, all objections that it could assert to those requests are waived. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.290(a).)

  • Hearing

    Oct 19, 2020

MASSE VS. FRUEHAN

Motion to Compel Responses to Special Interrogatories 2. Motion to Compel Responses to Requests for Production of Documents/Inspection Demands 3. Motion to Deem Admitted the Truth of Matters Specified in Requests for Admissions Moving Party (MP): Defendants Joel Fruehan and Annette Fruehan Responding Party (RP): Plaintiffs Eugene Masse and Amy Vrooman, in pro per Ruling Motion 1: Defendants’ unopposed motion to compel responses to Special Interrogatories, Set One is granted.

  • Hearing

    Oct 19, 2020

ALRABAH VS. UBER, INC

Motion to Compel Responses to Special Interrogatories Moving Party: Defendant Uber Technologies, Inc. (esa Uber, Inc.) Responding Party: None Ruling: Defendant’s Motion to Compel Responses from Plaintiff Sarah Alrabah to Special Interrogatories (Set One) is GRANTED. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.290(b).) If a party fails to serve a timely response to discovery requests, then by operation of law, all objections that it could assert to those requests are waived. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.290(a).)

  • Hearing

    Oct 19, 2020

SUMIT BHAGI VS RIGHT CHOICE IN-HOME CARE INC ET AL

MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONES TO SPECIAL INTTEROGATORIES, SET ONE (CCP §2030.300) Date: 10/16/20 (10:00 AM) Case: Sumit Bhagi v. Right Choice In-Home Care, Inc. et al. (BC700253) TENTATIVE RULING: Defendants Right Choice In-Home Care, Inc. (“Right Choice”), Linda Cairns, and Don Lucas Motion to Compel Further Responses to Special Interrogatories, Set One is GRANTED. Defendants moved to compel plaintiff’s further responses to Special Interrogatories, Set One, Nos. 10, 11, and 34.

  • Hearing

    Oct 16, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

KAUR V. FRESHCO FOOD CENTER

Motion: By Defendant to compel responses to form interrogatories, set one, special interrogatories, set one, and request for production, set one; and, request for monetary sanctions Tentative Ruling: To grant the moving party’s motion to compel responses to the Form Interrogatories (set one), Special Interrogatories (set one) and Request for Production of Documents (set one). To grant monetary sanctions in the amount of $365.

  • Hearing

    Oct 16, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

IOLLINE WALLACE VS LOS ANGELES COUNTY METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY, ET AL.

LA County Metropolitan Transportation Authority Three Motions by Defendant, Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, to Compel Plaintiff’s Responses to Form Interrogatories, Special Interrogatories, Request for Production of Documents, and Request for Sanctions are GRANTED. Plaintiff, Iolline Wallace, is ordered to provide verified responses to the foregoing written discovery without objections within 15 days of notice of this order. Cal. Code Civil Procedure § 2030.290(b); §2031.300(b).

  • Hearing

    Oct 16, 2020

JULIA RABIZADEH VS SCOTT RYAN FRANCISCO TEVES ET AL

. - MODIFIED TENTATIVE Plaintiff’s Three Motion to Compel Responses of Defendant, Scott Ryan Francisco Teves, to Form Interrogatories, Set Two; Special Interrogatories, Set Two; and Request for Production of Documents, Set Two; Request for Sanctions are GRANTED. Defendant, Scott Ryan Francisco Teves, is ordered to serve verified responses without objection to the foregoing written discovery within 15 days of notice of this order. Cal. Code Civil Procedure §§ 2030.290(b), 2031.300(b).

  • Hearing

    Oct 16, 2020

BROADWAY AIR CONDITIONING HEATING AND SHEET METAL INC VS 161

. ¶ 21.) 1617 Viewmont asserts that it inadvertently failed to respond to Boswell’s supplemental interrogatory and does not oppose the motion to the extent that it seeks to compel that response. 1617 Viewmont only opposes the instant motion to the extent it is a motion to compel further responses in regard to Boswell’s Special Interrogatories (Set One).

  • Hearing

    Oct 16, 2020

  • Type

    Collections

  • Sub Type

    Promisory Note

KAMAL VERMA, ET AL. VS RICHARD A VERA

Plaintiffs Kamal Verma’s and Seema Verma’s Motion for an Order Compelling Answers to Form Interrogatories (Set One), Special Interrogatories (Set One) and Request for Production of Documents (Set One) is GRANTED.

  • Hearing

    Oct 16, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 173     last » 

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

Please wait a moment while we load this page.