Motion Types Legal Issues

What is a Motion to Compel Production of Documents?

The Code of Civil Procedure § 2031.320(a) provides that the demanding party may move for an order compelling compliance if the responding party “fails to permit the inspection, copying, testing, or sampling in accordance with that party's statement of compliance....”

If a motion seeks to order the deponent to produce documents listed in the deposition notice, then the motion must “set forth specific facts showing good cause justifying the production for inspection of any document, electrically stored information, or tangible thing described in the deposition notice.” Code Civ. Proc. § 2025.450(b)(1).

A motion to compel the deposition of a party to the action must also be accompanied by a meet and confer declaration, or, when the deponent failed to attend the deposition, a declaration stating that the petitioner has contacted the deponent to inquire about the nonappearance. Code Civ. Proc. § 2025.450(b)(2).

The Code of Civil Procedure, section 2031.310 allows for a party demanding the production of document to move for an order to compel further responses if:

  1. a statement of compliance with the demand is incomplete,
  2. a representation of inability to comply is inadequate, incomplete, or evasive, and
  3. an objection in the response is without merit or too general. The motion must set forth specific facts showing good cause justifying the discovery sought by the demand.

The Code of Civil Procedure, section 2031.260(a) provides that within 30 days after service of a demand for production of documents the party to whom the demand was directed shall serve a written response to the party making the demand. CCP, section 2031.250(a) provides that the response shall be verified. Further, the Code of Civil Procedure, section 2031.280(b) requires the party to whom the demand for production was directed to produce the requested documents by the date specified in the demand unless an objection has been made to that date.

Most Useful Motion to Compel Production of Documents Examples

Recent Examples of Motion to Compel Production of Documents

1-25 of 500 results

CHARLES KUTA V. COLORTOKENS, INC.

...discovering information regarding Linkaj, a competing company ColorTokens alleges Kuta and several of his coworkers created while they were still employed with ColorTokens. Kuta opposes the motion to compel. ColorTokens’ Motion to Compel Discovery Responses ColorTokens moves to compel several items relating to Kuta’s involvement with Linkaj, a company that would compete with ColorTokens and that ColorT...

...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 by the inspection demand.” (Code Civ. Proc., §2031.310, subd. (b)(1); Kirkland v. Sup. Ct. (200...

  • Hearing

    Feb 20, 2020

BLOOMFIELD LAW GROUP, INC. VS. ELISABETH THIERIOT

...REOPEN DISCOVERY [DEFT] ELISABETH THIERIOT RULING The motion to compel production of documents is granted, in part. Plaintiff Bloomfield Law Group, Inc. (“Plaintiff") shall produce all non-privileged documents in response to defendant Elisabeth Thieriot’s (“Defendant”) requests for production of documents, namely Bates Stamped Numbered documents 2732 through 3252, Plaintiff shall further serve a properly si...

...recommendation. As a compromise, Ms. Monty suggested that Plaintiff provide a full and complete index to Defendant identifying the Bates Stamped document or documents that respond to each request for production along with a declaration in compliance with Code of Civil Procedure section 2031.210 (21).1 (See Declaration of Non-Resolution by Lawrence P. Hellmann, Exhibit 2.) Based on the representations of the...

  • Hearing

    Feb 14, 2020

LUPE VASQUEZ ET AL VS FASTRANS SHUTTLE LLC ET AL

... COMPEL DEPOSITION; GRANTING MOTION TO COMPEL PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS; IMPOSING SANCTIONS Dept. 31 1:30 P.M. February 14, 2020 Plaintiff served a sixth Notice of Deposition and Request for Production of Documents on Defendant Fastrans Shuttle, LLC (“Fastrans”) on October 7, 2019. The Notice indicated an intent to depose Fastrans’s PMK concerning 22 issues and request for production of 36 documents. It was noti...

...employee of Fastrans. Mr. Greer further attests that he represented SuperShuttle and Transdev, and that Fastrans was an independent contractor. This motion therefore follows. No opposition was filed. The motion to compel deposition is granted. CCP §2025.450(a). Plaintiff’s Counsel and Defense Counsel are ordered to work together to schedule a time, date, and location for Defendant’s PMK deposition(s). The de...

  • Hearing

    Feb 14, 2020

ALEXANDRA BRUNELL VS UBER TEHNOLOGIES INC

...INC., et al. Defendants. CASE NO: BC699297 [TENTATIVE] ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO COMPEL DEPOSITION OF PMK; GRANTING MOTION TO COMPEL DEPOSITION OF TRACEY BREEDEN; DENYING MOTION TO COMPEL PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS Dept. 31 1:30 P.M. February 13, 2020 Plaintiff served a Notice of Deposition on Defendant Uber Technologies, Inc. (“Uber”) on October 3, 2019. The Notice indicated an intent to depose Tracey Breed...

...deposition without attempting to meet and confer; that it is vague, ambiguous, irrelevant, overbroad, as well as a variety of boilerplate and procedural grounds. This motion therefore follows. The motion to compel deposition is granted to both Uber’s PMK and Tracey Breeden. CCP §2025.450(a). The Court finds it is reasonable to depose Tracey Breeden in connection with the Plaintiff’s cause of action. Uber did no...

  • Hearing

    Feb 13, 2020

TAPIA ARELLANO VS SOUTHCOAST WELDING & MANUFACTURING LLC

TENTATIVE RULING Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Further Discovery Responses is GRANTED. Plaintiff seeks to compel further responses to requests for production as to documents related to Defendant's employee's time records, wage statements, and agreements regarding meal and rest periods. Defendant has a legitimate privacy concern as to its employees' information. Plaintiff ...

...their contact information" and considered a case where interrogatory responses would have been made after a Belaire-West notice. (Id. at 554-55.) Williams did not consider a motion to compel production of documents nor the disclosure of even more private information – payroll records. The parties have already met and conferred regarding a Belaire-West notice; however, they disagree on the content of the Belaire-...

  • Hearing

    Feb 13, 2020

TAPIA ARELLANO VS SOUTHCOAST WELDING & MANUFACTURING LLC

TENTATIVE RULING Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Further Discovery Responses is GRANTED. Plaintiff seeks to compel further responses to requests for production as to documents related to Defendant's employee's time records, wage statements, and agreements regarding meal and rest periods. Defendant has a legitimate privacy concern as to its employees' information. Plaintiff ...

...their contact information" and considered a case where interrogatory responses would have been made after a Belaire-West notice. (Id. at 554-55.) Williams did not consider a motion to compel production of documents nor the disclosure of even more private information – payroll records. The parties have already met and conferred regarding a Belaire-West notice; however, they disagree on the content of the Belaire-...

  • Hearing

    Feb 13, 2020

BARBARA SCHLICK VS SAFEWAY INC

...CENTRAL DISTRICT BARBARA SCHLICK, Plaintiff(s), vs. SAFEWAY, INC., et al., Defendant(s). Case No.: BC669043 [TENTATIVE] ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO COMPEL DEPOSITION; DENYING MOTION TO COMPEL PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS AT DEPOSITION; IMPOSING SANCTIONS Dept. 3 1:30 p.m. February 10, 2020 Defendant has noticed Plaintiff’s deposition on multiple occasions. The parties agreed to continue the deposition several time...

...deposition on 12/23/19. At this time, Defendant moves to compel Plaintiff’s deposition and seeks to recover sanctions. The motion to compel is granted. CCP §2025.450(a) requires the Court to grant a motion to compel deposition unless the deponent has served a valid objection to the notice of deposition. Plaintiff did not object to the notice of deposition, but did not appear. Of note, Plaintiff’s attorney contend...

  • Hearing

    Feb 10, 2020

VIDEO TECH SERVICES, INC. D/B/A/ VTS SERVICES, A NEVADA CORPORATION VS THOMAS D. WOOLSEY, ET AL.

...Plaintiff Video Tech Services, Inc. Responding Party: Defendant Thomas D. Woolsey Motion to Compel Production of Documents The court considered the moving, opposition, and reply papers. RULING The motion is CONTINUED to March 18, 2020, at 8:30 a.m. Plaintiff is ordered to file a notice of related cases in both SC105947 and the herein case forthwith. Plaintiff is ordered to give notice of the ruling.

  • Hearing

    Feb 7, 2020

KANG V. GERIQ LOGISTICS LLC

Plaintiff Sun Kang’s Motion to Compel Depositions and Document Production Plaintiff Sun Kang moves to compel Defendant Geriq Logistics LLC (Geriq) to produce for depositions (i) Defendant William Mesa, (ii) Mesa’s supervisor at the time of the incident at issue, and (iii) G...

... compel Geriq to produce documents at the PMQ deposition. For the following reasons, Plaintiff’s motion is granted in part and denied in part. Geriq does not address in its opposition Plaintiff’s motion to compel Defendant Mesa to appear for deposition or Plaintiff’s motion to compel Mesa’s supervisor at the time of the incident to appear for deposition and thus appears to concede that Mesa and his supervisor ...

  • Hearing

    Feb 6, 2020

STESHENKO V. DE ANZA COLLEGE

...408.808.6856 and the opposing party no later than 4:00 PM on 5 February 2020. Please specify the issue to be contested when calling the Court and Counsel. ORDERS ON MOTIONS OF PLAINTIFF TO COMPEL PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS FROM COMMUNITY HOSPITAL OF MONTEREY PENINSULA AND NATIVIDAD MEDICAL CENTER NO TENTATIVE RULING This Court notes that this action was filed on 17 October 2017. This Department intends to comply with ...

  • Hearing

    Feb 6, 2020

SMARTRISE ELEVATOR SERVICE, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION VS 18049 COASTLINE DRIVE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC., A CALIFORNIA COMMON INTEREST DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION INCORPORATED, ET AL.

Smartrise Elevator Service, Inc. v. Hine Property Management, et al. MOTION FOR AN ORDER COMPELLING PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS AND FOR MONETARY SANCTIONS AGAINST PLAINTIFF SMARTRISE ELEVATOR SERVICE, IN C. AND ITS ATTORNEY KAREN E. JUNG, ESQ. IN THE SUM OF $1410 MOVING PARTY: Defendant Stephen Maine RESPONDING PARTY(S): Pla...

...DENIED. Defendant’s request for sanctions is DENIED. DISCUSSION: Motion To Compel Production of Documents Although Defendant’s hearing reservation was for a motion to compel discovery (not further discovery), a motion to compel further discovery is, in fact, what Defendant should have filed. As the statutory basis for this motion, Defendant cites CCP §§ 2020.030 and 2031.310 in the caption and the notice of motion ...

  • Hearing

    Feb 3, 2020

SEO VS. PARK

PLT Youngjin Seo 1. Motion to Compel Production X2 (1) MOTION TO COMPEL COMPLIANCE WITH SUBPOENA Plaintiff Youngjin Seo’s motion to compel third-party Hyo Kwan Lee to comply with the business records subpoena served on him on 4/26/19 is denied as m...

...Plaintiff disputing the foregoing. Accordingly, based on the limited opposition demonstrating compliance with the subpoena, it would seem the motion is moot. Plaintiff shall give notice. (2) MOTION TO COMPEL PRODUCTION Plaintiff Youngjin Seo’s motion to compel Defendant SC&P Resources, Inc.’s compliance with his request to inspect corporate records pursuant to Corp. Code § 1600, et seq. is denied. Plainti...

  • Hearing

    Jan 30, 2020

RANDOLPH, TERESA VS TRUSTEES OF THE CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY ET AL

As to Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Production of Documents, following further meet and confer efforts Plaintiff has limited the scope of the Motion to the following Requests to which she still seeks further response: 33, 37, 63, 64, 67, 81, 83, 84, 85, 86 and...

...Request Nos. 63, 64, 81, 84, and 86. The Motion is DENIED as to Request Nos. 33, 67, 85 and 87. The Motion is GRANTED WITH LIMITATIONS as to Request Nos. 37 and 83. Request No. 37 is limited to only those documents in files (hard-copy and electronic) in Defendants' possession. Request No. 83 is limited to all "root folders" EXCLUDING the following: City of Chico, Climate Leadership Commit, CSU Systemwide, Fletch...

  • Hearing

    Jan 29, 2020

PAUL EDALAT, ET AL. VS FEDERICO GUILLERMO CABO, ET AL.

Paul Edalat, et al. v. Federico Guillermo Cabo, et al. MOTION TO COMPEL COMPLIANCE WITH THIRD PARTY DEPOSITION SUBPOENA AND PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS TO HOWARD MANN, THE PERSON MOST KNOWLEDGEABLE FOR ALTERNATE HEALTH, AND REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS MOVING PARTY: Plaintiffs and Cross-Defendants Paul Edalat and LIWA N.A. RESPONDING PARTY(S): Third Parti...

...LIWA N.A.’s motion to compel compliance with third-party deposition subpoena and production of documents to Howard Mann, the personal most knowledgeable for Alternate Health is GRANTED. Deposition and production is to occur within 30 days of the date of this order. Plaintiffs’ request for sanctions is GRANTED against Howard Mann and Alternate Health USA, Inc., jointly and severally, in the amount of $2,123.3...

  • Hearing

    Jan 28, 2020

PATEL V. IRAVANTCHI

...DENIES Plaintiff Sunil Patel’s Motion to Compel Defendant Sholeh Iravantchi, Esq. to provide further responses to Requests for Production of Documents, Set One, Nos. 3 and 13. Plaintiff asks the Court to compel Defendant to produce copies of all dissolution petitions that she filed as an attorney of record in the past 10 years. (RPD No. 3). Plaintiff also asks the Court to compel Defendant to produce all cer...

...Iravantchi, Esq. to provide further responses to Special Interrogatory No. 7. Defendant is to provide a verified, full, and complete response without objections no later than 2/14/20. If a timely motion to compel has been filed, the burden is on the responding party to justify any objection or failure fully to answer the interrogatories. [Coy v. Sup.Ct. (Wolcher) (1962) 58 C2d 210, 220-221; Fairmont Ins. Co. v...

  • Hearing

    Jan 27, 2020

BRIAN DENMARK VS. GAMESCAPE PRIME, LLC

NATURE OF PROCEEDINGS: MOTION TO COMPELPRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS AND FURTHER RESPONSES TO INTERROGATORIES; REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS [PLTF] BRIAN DENMARK RULING The court inadvertently issued a tentative ruling taking the discovery motion set to be heard on January 1...

...court now issues its tentative ruling. Plaintiffs’ motion to compel further responses to form interrogatories is granted. Plaintiffs’ motion to compel further responses to requests for production of documents is denied. The court denies the request for sanctions. Timeliness nfMotian Plaintiffs Brian Denmark and Seren Mohn (collectively “P1aintiffs”) filed this motion on September 13, 2019. Defendant Garnes...

  • Hearing

    Jan 24, 2020

DOROTHY CLARK VS. STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF STATE HOSPITALS

The following is a copy of the tentative ruling on the motion of Defendant California Department of State Hospitals ("Defendant") to compel production of documents from Plaintiff Dorothy Clark ("Plaintiff"), set for hearing on January 24, 2020 at 9:00 a.m., in Department 28. NOTICE: To request oral argument on this matter, you must call the Court at (916) 874-...

...made and the requisite fees are paid in advance of the hearing. Motion to Compel Defendant's unopposed motion to compel production of documents is GRANTED. Defendant served requests for production of documents ("RFPs) to Plaintiff on September 27, 2018. (Declaration of Lowhurst, ¶ 2 and Ex. A.) Plaintiff's responses were initially due on November 1, 2018. (See Code Civ. Proc. § 2031.260.) Plaintiff asked fo...

  • Hearing

    Jan 23, 2020

CENIGENT HEALTH ENHANCEMENT MEDICAL INSTITUTE VS DAN MINTZ

Cenigent Health Enhancement Medical Institute v. Dan Mintz, et al. MOTION TO COMPEL PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS FROM THIRD PARTIES IN RESPONSE TO BUSINESS RECORDS SUBPOENA MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff Cenigent Health Enhancement Medical Institute RESPONDING PARTY(S): Defendants Dan Mintz, Bing Wu, DMG Entertainmen...

...services totaling over $1.5 million. Plaintiff moves to compel production of documents from third parties New Hope Fertility Center and Dr. John Zhang. TENTATIVE RULING: On December 23, 2019, this motion was continued to this date to give Defendant an opportunity to either explain their objections to particular requests in these third-party subpoenas or to confirm that they have chosen to obtain the r...

  • Hearing

    Jan 23, 2020

MARGIANNE REYNOLDS VS RACHEL GARCIA, ET AL.

...DISTRICT MARGIANNE REYNOLDS, Plaintiff(s), vs. RACHEL GARCIA, et al., Defendant(s). Case No.: 19STCV04471 [TENTATIVE] ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO COMPEL DEPOSITION; DENYING MOTION TO COMPEL PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS AT DEPOSITION Dept. 31 1:30 p.m. January 22, 2020 Defendant has noticed Plaintiff’s deposition on multiple occasions. Plaintiff failed to appear at her properly noticed deposition on 11/14/19, and...

... compel Plaintiff’s deposition, to compel production of documents at deposition, and seeks to recover sanctions. The motion to compel is granted. CCP §2025.450(a) requires the Court to grant a motion to compel deposition unless the deponent has served a valid objection to the notice of deposition. Plaintiff did not object to the notice of deposition, but did not appear. Of note, any opposition to the motion ...

  • Hearing

    Jan 22, 2020

BAKER VS. STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION

...phones of Mr. Koon and Mr. Alcala. There is no evidence Caltrans destroyed evidence in response to plaintiff’s Requests for Production, Set One, which were served on 3-26-18, as it produced responsive documents. Nor is there evidence of Caltrans destroying evidence, namely the 2016 state-issued cell phones of Mr. Koon and Mr. Alcala in anticipation of a request to inspect these cell phones considering that C...

...(Set Nine), to inspect the state-issued hard drives and cell phones of Koon and Alcala until nearly five months later. 4-24-19, and over a year after plaintiff served its first request for production of documents in March 2018. Therefore, a request for inspection of the cell phones of Mr. Koon and Mr. Alcala would not necessarily be anticipated. “[A] party moving for discovery sanctions based on the spoliation...

  • Hearing

    Jan 21, 2020

ROMULO CASIANO GOMEZ VS BMC STOCK HOLDING

Gomez v. BMC Stock Holding Defendant’s Motion to Compel Production of Documents by Intaktics, Inc.; Request for Sanctions is GRANTED. Cal Code Civil Procedure § 1987.1, §2025.480. The witness, Intaktics, Inc., is ordered to comply with the deposition subpoena for production of b...

  • Hearing

    Jan 21, 2020

ROMULO CASIANO GOMEZ VS BMC STOCK HOLDING

Gomez v. BMC Stock Holding Defendant’s Motion to Compel Production of Documents by Intaktics, Inc.; Request for Sanctions is GRANTED. Cal Code Civil Procedure § 1987.1, §2025.480. The witness, Intaktics, Inc., is ordered to comply with the deposition subpoena for production of b...

  • Hearing

    Jan 21, 2020

THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA VS. KAISER FOUNDATION HOSPITALS

The motion to compel further responses to special interrogatories and the motion to compel production of documents filed by Defendant and Cross-Complainant Kaiser Foundation Health Plan Inc. (“Kaiser”) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part, as set forth below. Legal Authority The scope of discovery is broad. “For ...

...should be well calibrated; the lancet is to be preferred over the sledge hammer.” (Calcor Space Facility, Inc. v. Superior Court (1997) 53 Cal.App.4th 216, 221.) Further, a motion to compel production of documents must “set forth specific facts showing good cause justifying the discovery sought by the demand.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.310(b)(1).) As to the proper rate of reimbursement, it is equivalent to “the ...

  • Hearing

    Jan 17, 2020

BRIAN DENMARK VS. GAMESCAPE PRIME, LLC

NATURE OF PROCEEDINGS: MOTION TO COMPELPRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS AND FURTHER RESPONSES TO INTERROGATORIES; REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS [PLTF] BRIAN DENMARK RULING This matter was referred to the discovery facilitator program pursuant to Local Rule 1.13B. Thus, the cour...

...court, as required by Local Rule 1.13 (H)(1). Accordingly, pursuant to Local Rule, 1.13(H)(2) the hearing on plaintiffs’ motions to compel further responses to form interrogatories and for production of documents set for 01/17/20, is ordered off-calendar. Should the parties fail to reach resolution through the facilitator, either party may request (by ex parte application) that the court re-set the motion for ...

  • Hearing

    Jan 17, 2020

THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA VS. KAISER FOUNDATION HOSPITALS

The motion to compel further responses to special interrogatories and the motion to compel production of documents filed by Defendant and Cross-Complainant Kaiser Foundation Health Plan Inc. (“Kaiser”) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part, as set forth below. Legal Authority The scope of discovery is broad. “For ...

...should be well calibrated; the lancet is to be preferred over the sledge hammer.” (Calcor Space Facility, Inc. v. Superior Court (1997) 53 Cal.App.4th 216, 221.) Further, a motion to compel production of documents must “set forth specific facts showing good cause justifying the discovery sought by the demand.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.310(b)(1).) As to the proper rate of reimbursement, it is equivalent to “the ...

  • Hearing

    Jan 16, 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/.