On May 26, 2006 a
Order
was filed
involving a dispute between
Maiman, Ruth,
Shorenstein Company Llc,
Shorenstein Realty Services L.P. (Sued As,
and
Doe One Through Doe Twenty,
Millar Elevator Service Company,
Schindler Elevator Corporation,
Shorenstein Company Llc,
Shorenstein Realty,
Shorenstein Realty Services L.P. (Sued As,
for PERSONAL INJURY/PROPERTY DAMAGE - NON-VEHICLE RELATED
in the District Court of San Francisco County.
Preview
ARUN
ment Scanning Lead Sheet
15-2008 4:51 pm
ORDERCharles H. Horn, (State Bar No. 063362)
Jill K. Rizzo, (State Bar No. 236471) F I L 1
WRIGHT, ROBINSON, OSTHIMER & TATUM Sn Frans gon ® see Dp
44 Montgomery Street, 18th Floor ee OUnYy Supsrier Cum
San Francisco, California 94104-4705 MAY 1 5
Telephone: (415) 391-7111 GOR 2008
Telefax: (415) 391-8766 sores Paros, Clark
Attorneys for Defendants Deputy Signe
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 DENYING DEFENDANTS’
MOTION FOR SANCTIONS
v. AGAINST PLAINTIFF AND HER
COUNSEL OF RECORD FOR
SHORENSTEIN COMPANY LLC, FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE
SHORENSTEIN REALTY, and DOE ONE COURT’S ORDER COMPELLING
through DOE TWENTY, HER DEPOSITION
Defendants.
Defendants SHORENSTEIN COMPANY LLC AND SHORENSTEIN REALTY
SERVICES, L.P.’S (“Defendants”) Motion for Sanctions Against Plaintiff Ruth Maiman and Her
Counsel of Record for Failure to Comply with the Court’s Order Compelling Her Deposition
came on regularly for hearing on April 22, 2008 at 10:30 a.m. in Department 612 of the above-
captioned court. Jill K. Rizzo appeared on behalf of Defendants Shorenstein Company LLC and
Shorenstein Realty Services, L.P. 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:
Mt
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AGAINST PLAINTIFF AND HER
COUNSEL OF RECORD FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE COURT’S ORDER COMPELLING HER
DEPOSITION~ ~
1 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants’ motion is DENIED.
2
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AGAINST PLAINTIFF AND HER
COUNSEL OF RECORD FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE COURT’S ORDER COMPELLING HER
DEPOSITION
Document Filed Date
May 15, 2008
Case Filing Date
May 26, 2006
Category
PERSONAL INJURY/PROPERTY DAMAGE - NON-VEHICLE RELATED
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Preview
ARUN ment Scanning Lead Sheet 15-2008 4:51 pm ORDERCharles H. Horn, (State Bar No. 063362) Jill K. Rizzo, (State Bar No. 236471) F I L 1 WRIGHT, ROBINSON, OSTHIMER & TATUM Sn Frans gon ® see Dp 44 Montgomery Street, 18th Floor ee OUnYy Supsrier Cum San Francisco, California 94104-4705 MAY 1 5 Telephone: (415) 391-7111 GOR 2008 Telefax: (415) 391-8766 sores Paros, Clark Attorneys for Defendants Deputy Signe 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 DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SANCTIONS v. AGAINST PLAINTIFF AND HER COUNSEL OF RECORD FOR SHORENSTEIN COMPANY LLC, FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE SHORENSTEIN REALTY, and DOE ONE COURT’S ORDER COMPELLING through DOE TWENTY, HER DEPOSITION Defendants. Defendants SHORENSTEIN COMPANY LLC AND SHORENSTEIN REALTY SERVICES, L.P.’S (“Defendants”) Motion for Sanctions Against Plaintiff Ruth Maiman and Her Counsel of Record for Failure to Comply with the Court’s Order Compelling Her Deposition came on regularly for hearing on April 22, 2008 at 10:30 a.m. in Department 612 of the above- captioned court. Jill K. Rizzo appeared on behalf of Defendants Shorenstein Company LLC and Shorenstein Realty Services, L.P. 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: Mt ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AGAINST PLAINTIFF AND HER COUNSEL OF RECORD FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE COURT’S ORDER COMPELLING HER DEPOSITION~ ~ 1 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants’ motion is DENIED. 2 ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AGAINST PLAINTIFF AND HER COUNSEL OF RECORD FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE COURT’S ORDER COMPELLING HER DEPOSITION