On January 25, 2019 a
Order
was filed
involving a dispute between
California Fire Protection Coalition,
Del Toro Trejo, Juan Carlos,
Filed By: Fire Guard Corporation,
Fire Guard Corporation,
Shahangian, Bahman Brian,
and
California Department Of Forestry And Fire Protection,
California Office Of The State Fire Marshal,
Dennis Mathisen In His Official Capacity As State Fire Marshal,
Does 1-10,
Jeffery Schwartz In His Official Capacity As Deputy State Fire Marshall,
Mike Richwine In His Official Capacity As State Fire Marshal,
for (Civil Rights/Discrimination)
in the District Court of Sacramento County.
Preview
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,
COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO
GORDON D SCHABER COURTHOUSE
MINUTE ORDER
DATE: 10/27/2022 TIME: 01:30:00 PM DEPT: 53
JUDICIAL OFFICER PRESIDING: Richard K. Sueyoshi
CLERK: P. Lopez
REPORTER/ERM: None
BAILIFF/COURT ATTENDANT: N. Alvi, J. Reilly
CASE NO: 34-2019-00249221-CU-CR-GDS CASE INIT.DATE: 01/25/2019
CASE TITLE: Fire Guard Corporation vs. California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection
CASE CATEGORY: Civil - Unlimited
EVENT TYPE: Motion to Compel - Other - Civil Law and Motion
APPEARANCES
Nature of Proceeding: Motion to Compel Responses to Discovery & to Deem Admitted
TENTATIVE RULING
Defendant Office of the State Fire Marshall's ("OSFM") motion (1) to compel plaintiffs' discovery
responses and (2) to deem admitted the requests for admissions directed to plaintiffs is UNOPPOSED
and is GRANTED as follows.
Defendant OSFM first seeks to compel plaintiffs Fire Guard Corporation, Bahman Brian Shahanigian
and Juan Carlos Del Toro Trejo's respective responses to form and special interrogatories and to
requests for production of documents.
Plaintiffs do not oppose the motion to compel but merely ask that their responses (without objections) to
the discovery requests be due at least 25 days after the Court issues its ruling on defendants' pending
motion for summary adjudication, now set for hearing on 11/1/2022.
In reply, defendant states that it is willing to accept responses (without objections) to the interrogatories
and requests for production 25 days after the ruling on the pending motion for summary adjudication but
adds that since no responses to the requests for admissions have been received, the matters therein
should be deemed admitted.
Finding no substantive opposition, this motion to compel is GRANTED. Each of the three plaintiffs
identified above shall provide verified responses, without objections, to the subject form and special
interrogatories and to requests for production of documents no later than 11/30/2022 (unless defendant
OSFM agrees to a later date memorialized in writing).
Defendant did not request any monetary sanctions in connection with this motion to compel.
Moving counsel is advised that where discovery responses (as opposed to further responses) are
sought, copies of the discovery need not be included with the motion. Proof of service is all that is
required.
DATE: 10/27/2022 MINUTE ORDER Page 1
DEPT: 53 Calendar No.
CASE TITLE: Fire Guard Corporation vs. California CASE NO: 34-2019-00249221-CU-CR-GDS
Department of Forestry and Fire Protection
Defendant OSFM also seeks an order deeming admitted those matters specified in its requests for
admissions to plaintiffs Fire Guard Corporation, Bahman Brian Shahanigian and Juan Carlos Del Toro
Trejo, none of whom have filed any opposition. Therefore, coupled with plaintiffs' apparent failure thus
far to serve "before the hearing on the motion" proposed responses that are in substantial compliance
with Code of Civil Procedure §2033.220, the motion to deem admitted shall also be GRANTED.
Defendant OSFM did not request an award of (mandatory) monetary sanctions.
This minute order is effective immediately. No formal order or other notice is required. (Code Civ. Proc.
§1019.5; CRC Rule 3.1312.)
COURT RULING
There being no request for oral argument, the Court affirmed the tentative ruling.
DATE: 10/27/2022 MINUTE ORDER Page 2
DEPT: 53 Calendar No.
Document Filed Date
October 27, 2022
Case Filing Date
January 25, 2019
Category
(Civil Rights/Discrimination)
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Preview
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO GORDON D SCHABER COURTHOUSE MINUTE ORDER DATE: 10/27/2022 TIME: 01:30:00 PM DEPT: 53 JUDICIAL OFFICER PRESIDING: Richard K. Sueyoshi CLERK: P. Lopez REPORTER/ERM: None BAILIFF/COURT ATTENDANT: N. Alvi, J. Reilly CASE NO: 34-2019-00249221-CU-CR-GDS CASE INIT.DATE: 01/25/2019 CASE TITLE: Fire Guard Corporation vs. California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection CASE CATEGORY: Civil - Unlimited EVENT TYPE: Motion to Compel - Other - Civil Law and Motion APPEARANCES Nature of Proceeding: Motion to Compel Responses to Discovery & to Deem Admitted TENTATIVE RULING Defendant Office of the State Fire Marshall's ("OSFM") motion (1) to compel plaintiffs' discovery responses and (2) to deem admitted the requests for admissions directed to plaintiffs is UNOPPOSED and is GRANTED as follows. Defendant OSFM first seeks to compel plaintiffs Fire Guard Corporation, Bahman Brian Shahanigian and Juan Carlos Del Toro Trejo's respective responses to form and special interrogatories and to requests for production of documents. Plaintiffs do not oppose the motion to compel but merely ask that their responses (without objections) to the discovery requests be due at least 25 days after the Court issues its ruling on defendants' pending motion for summary adjudication, now set for hearing on 11/1/2022. In reply, defendant states that it is willing to accept responses (without objections) to the interrogatories and requests for production 25 days after the ruling on the pending motion for summary adjudication but adds that since no responses to the requests for admissions have been received, the matters therein should be deemed admitted. Finding no substantive opposition, this motion to compel is GRANTED. Each of the three plaintiffs identified above shall provide verified responses, without objections, to the subject form and special interrogatories and to requests for production of documents no later than 11/30/2022 (unless defendant OSFM agrees to a later date memorialized in writing). Defendant did not request any monetary sanctions in connection with this motion to compel. Moving counsel is advised that where discovery responses (as opposed to further responses) are sought, copies of the discovery need not be included with the motion. Proof of service is all that is required. DATE: 10/27/2022 MINUTE ORDER Page 1 DEPT: 53 Calendar No. CASE TITLE: Fire Guard Corporation vs. California CASE NO: 34-2019-00249221-CU-CR-GDS Department of Forestry and Fire Protection Defendant OSFM also seeks an order deeming admitted those matters specified in its requests for admissions to plaintiffs Fire Guard Corporation, Bahman Brian Shahanigian and Juan Carlos Del Toro Trejo, none of whom have filed any opposition. Therefore, coupled with plaintiffs' apparent failure thus far to serve "before the hearing on the motion" proposed responses that are in substantial compliance with Code of Civil Procedure §2033.220, the motion to deem admitted shall also be GRANTED. Defendant OSFM did not request an award of (mandatory) monetary sanctions. This minute order is effective immediately. No formal order or other notice is required. (Code Civ. Proc. §1019.5; CRC Rule 3.1312.) COURT RULING There being no request for oral argument, the Court affirmed the tentative ruling. DATE: 10/27/2022 MINUTE ORDER Page 2 DEPT: 53 Calendar No.