arrow left
arrow right
  • UNITED NATURAL FOODS, INC. VS AMERICOLD LOGISTICS, LLC, ET AL. Contractual Fraud (General Jurisdiction) document preview
  • UNITED NATURAL FOODS, INC. VS AMERICOLD LOGISTICS, LLC, ET AL. Contractual Fraud (General Jurisdiction) document preview
						
                                

Preview

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES Civil Division Southeast District, Norwalk Courthouse, Department C 20STCV03153 August 12, 2021 UNITED NATURAL FOODS, INC. vs AMERICOLD 10:30 AM LOGISTICS, LLC, et al. Judge: Honorable Olivia Rosales CSR: L. Augustine, CSR #10419 Judicial Assistant: S. Alvarez ERM: None Courtroom Assistant: C. Cappadona Deputy Sheriff: None APPEARANCES: For Plaintiff(s): No Appearances For Defendant(s): David A Ciarlo (X) appearing via LACourtConnect; Aaron Bennett Craig (X) appearing via LACourtConnect NATURE OF PROCEEDINGS: Hearing on Motion to Compel Further Discovery Responses To Produce Documents And Provide Further Responses and Request For Sanctions Pursuant to Government Code sections 68086, 70044, and California Rules of Court, rule 2.956, Lisa A. Augustine, CSR #10419, certified shorthand reporter is appointed as an official Court Reporter Pro Tempore in these proceedings, and is ordered to comply with the terms of the Court Reporter Agreement. The Order is signed and filed this date. The Court Reporter appears remotely via LACourtConnect. A tentative order is issued. The matter is called for hearing and argued. The Court having considered the papers and oral arguments, rules as follows: The Motion to Compel Further Discovery Responses To Produce Documents and Provide Further Responses filed by United Natural Foods, Inc. on 04/22/2021 is Granted in Part. Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant UNITED NATURAL FOODS, INC.’s Motion to Compel Defendants’ Further Responses to Request for Production of Documents and Special Interrogatories is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. The Court notes that supplemental responses were served by Defendant on July 23, 2021. However, the Court finds that those supplemental responses are not substantively different from the responses at issue. Therefore, the Motion is not rendered moot. Minute Order Page 1 of 4