Party Discovery: RUTH MAIMAN VS. SHORENSTEIN COMPANY LLC et al

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

						
                                
Preview
                                ATOM

San Francisco Superior Courts
Information Technology Group

Document Scanning Lead Sheet
May-16-2008 9:57 am

Case Number: CGC-06-452609
Filing Date: May-16-2008 9:24
Juke Box: 001 Image: 02125541
ORDER

RUTH MAIMAN VS. SHORENSTEIN COMPANY LLC et al

001002125541

Instructions:
Please place this sheet on top of the document to be scanned.Dp Oe ND YH

10
1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
2
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

~ ~

Charles H. Horn, (State Bar No. 063362)

Fill K. Rizzo, (State Bar No. 236471) Fr I
WRIGHT, ROBINSON, OSTHIMER & TATUM s
44 Montgomery Street, 18th Floor Franeison G:

San Francisco, California 94104-4705
Telephone: (415) 391-7111
Telefax: (415) 391-8766 Gi

BY:

Attorneys for Defendants
SHORENSTEIN COMPANY LLC AND SHORENSTEIN
REALTY SERVICES, L.P.

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
UNLIMITED CIVIL JURISDICTION

RUTH MAIMAN, Case No.: CGC 06 452609
Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS
SHORENSTEIN COMPANY LLC
v. AND SHORENSTEIN REALTY
SERVICES L.P.’S MOTION TO
SHORENSTEIN COMPANY LLC, COMPEL PLAINTIFF RUTH
SHORENSTEIN REALTY, and DOE ONE MAIMAN’S FURTHER RESPONSES
through DOE TWENTY, TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES
AND FOR MONETARY SANCTIONS
Defendants.

Defendants SHORENSTEIN COMPANY LLC and SHORENSTEIN REALTY
SERVICES, L.P.’S (“Defendants”) Motion to Compel Plaintiff Ruth Maiman’s Further
Responses to Special Interrogatories, and for Monetary Sanctions came on regularly for hearing
on April 9, 2008 at 10:30 a.m. in Department 612 of the above-captioned court. Ms. Jill K. Rizzo
appeared on behalf of Defendants Shorenstein Company LLC and Shorenstein Realty Services,
L.P. Mr. Herbert Yanowitz appeared on behalf of Plaintiff.

Based on the moving, opposition, and reply papers submitted herewith, oral argument

made at the hearing and good cause appearing therefore:

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants’ instant Motion to Compel is GRANTED.

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS SHORENSTEIN COMPANY LLC AND SHORENSTEIN REALTY
SERVICES L.P.’S MOTION TO COMPEL PLAINTIFF RUTH MAIMAN’S FURTHER RESPONSES TO
SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES AND FOR MONETARY SANCTIONS~ ~
All responses must be full and complete at the time they are made. Plaintiff's responses to this
discovery are inadequate. While the responses might convey the only information available at
the time of the responses, the reservation that discovery is continuing is improper and makes the
responses less than full and complete.

Plaintiff shall provide further responses to the second set of Defendant SHORENSTEIN
COMPANY LLC’s Special Interrogatories 17, 21, 25, 29, and 33.

Plaintiff shall also provide further responses to the first set of Defendant SHORENSTEIN
REALTY SERVICES, L.P. Special Interrogatories 2, 6, and 10. Plaintiff shall provide all further
responses within 30 days of notice of this order.

The Court finds that the responses were a misuse of the discovery process. Sanctions are
awarded against Plaintiff in the amount of $600.00, to be paid within 30 days of notice of this

order.

Dated: fob ’ (2 —
Commissioner e| Superiot

TTA. HEWLETT, JR.
Pro Tempore

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS SHORENSTEIN COMPANY LLC AND SHORENSTEIN REALTY
SERVICES L.P.’S MOTION TO COMPEL PLAINTIFF RUTH MAIMAN’S FURTHER RESPONSES TO
SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES AND FOR MONETARY SANCTIONS