On October 08, 2019 a
Hearing
was filed
involving a dispute between
Acosta, Sandy,
Jetcruzer International, Llc.,
and
Acosta, Sandy,
Does 3 Through 50,
Guzman, Marvin J.,
Zepeda, Ulises A.,
for Fraud
in the District Court of San Bernardino County.
Preview
From Law Office 1 310 382 2092 Sat Jul 11 00 51 01 2020 PDT Page 8 of 17
S
1 David M Shaby II Esq 97871 OUN Y O SAN
SAN R RNARDINQ DISTRICT
dshaby@shabyandassociates com
2 R Christopher Harshman Esq 248214
charshman a shabyandassociates com
L Z
3
DAVID M SHABY II 8L ASSOCIATESr APC
11949 Jefferson Boulevard Suite 104
Y
4
Culver City California 90230 AN7M NY R71NEZ EPUTY
Telephone 310 827 7171
5 Facsimile 310 822 8529
6 AttorneysforDefendant and Cross Complainant Sandy Acosta
7
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
9 COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO
10 Jetcruzer International LLC Case no CIVDS1930132
11 Assigned to the Hon Tom Garza Dept S27
Plaintiff
OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS
12 S
TO FORM INTERROGATORIES
13 Sandy Acosta et al
Declaration ofR ChristopherHarshman filed
14 concurrently herewith
Defendants
Date July 23 2020
15 And Related Cross Complaint
Time 10 00 a m
Department S27
16
Complaint filed October S 2019
17
Trial date TBD
1S Defendant and cross complainant
Sandy Acosta Acosta hereby opposes the motion to
19
compel answers to form interrogatories brought by plaintiffand cross defendantJetcruzer International
Z LLC Plaintiff
21 I STATEMENT OF FACTS
22
The discovery requests at issue in this motion were served one day after California Governor
23
Newsom proclaimed a state ofemergency due to the global pandemic Declaration of R Christopher
24
Harshman Harshman Decl filed concurrently herewith 2 3
The responses were received by
25
Ms Acosta s counsel s office while it was scrambling to transition to a work from home situation
26
Id David M
4 8 Shaby II Associates APC is a tiny understaffed law firm ill equipped to
27 weather the unprecedented demands it COVID 19 Id
placed on by the current pandemic 8 All of
28
1
OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO COMPFL ANSWERS TO FORM INTERROGATORIES
From Law Office 1 310 382 2092 Sat 7u1 11 00 51 01 2020 PDT Page 9 of 17
1 that notwithstanding counsel has been working diligently with Ms Acosta Id 9 and verified
2 responses without objections will have been received by Plaintiff s counselwell in advance of the
3 hearing on this motion Id 10
4 II 1 RGUMENT
5
As responses will have been served and received prior to the hearing on this motion it is moot as
6 to the requested relief to compel responses As to sanctions Ms Acosta asserts the COVID 19
7 pandemic and the widespread disruptions it has caused constitute circumstances that make the
8 imposition of a sanction unjust Cal Code Civ Proc 2030 290 c
9 III CONCLUSION
10 The Court must deny the motion as moot and given the circumstances decline to award
11 sanctions
12
Respectfully submitted
13 DAv n M SHASY II AssoclATEs
y
R
14 Date July 10 2020 y
15
hristopher Harshman Esq
Attarneys for Defendant and Cross Complainant
16 Sandy Acosta
Electronically signedpursuant to Cav Code 1d33 7 d
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
OPPOSI 1 lOIV 1 O MO 1 lOn 1 O COMPEL ANSWERS 1 O FORM INTERIZOGATORIES
Document Filed Date
July 13, 2020
Case Filing Date
October 08, 2019
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.