On February 12, 2020 a
Conference
was filed
involving a dispute between
Harold Crawford Co., Inc.,
James Welch As Personal Representative For The Estate Of Carmen J. Hadley,
and
Harold Crawford Co., Inc.,
for 06-CV Breach of Contract/Warranty-Civil Unlimited
in the District Court of Kern County.
Preview
Superior Court of California
County of Kern
Bakersfield Department 17
Hearing Date: 07/19/2021 Time: 8:30 AM - 12:00 PM
JAMES WELCH AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ESTATE OF CARMEN J. HADLEY VS HAROLD CRAWFORD
CO., INC.
BCV-20-100434
Honorable: Thomas S. Clark Clerk: Linda K. Hall
Court Reporter: VICTORIA A. SANCHEZ Bailiff: Deputy Sheriff
Interpreter: Language Of:
PARTIES:
Present:
JAMES WELCH AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE DANIELS, WILLIAM A Attorney, Present
FOR THE ESTATE OF CARMEN J. HADLEY
Plaintiff, Not Present
HAROLD CRAWFORD CO., INC. Defendant, Not DODGIN, DUSTIN S Attorney, Present
Present
NATURE OF PROCEEDINGS: MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER DISCOVERY RESPONSES DEMURRER, MOTION TO
STRIKE, CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE
Hearing Start Time: 8:57 AM
The above entitled cause came on regularly on this date and time with parties and/or counsel appearing as
reflected above.
The Court appoints Victoria A. Sanchez from the Pro Tempore list as the Official Court Reporter for Motions. Oath
on file.
Matter argued by counsel and submitted.
The Court makes the following findings and orders:
Defendant's Demurrer to Second Amended Complaint - Overruled.
Defendant's Motion to Strike - Denied.
Plaintiff's Motion To Compel Defendant The Harold Crawford Company, Inc.'s Further Responses To Deposition Of
The Harold Crawford Company, Inc.'s Person Most Qualified And Request For Production Of Documents - Granted
in part / Denied in part.
MINUTES
Page 1 of 3
JAMES WELCH AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ESTATE OF BCV-20-100434
CARMEN J. HADLEY VS HAROLD CRAWFORD CO., INC.
The court declines to continue the hearing on this motion again as requested by the opposing defendant. This
motion was filed on 12/03/20 and has been continued several times, giving defendant plenty of time to craft any
opposition it deemed fit and an opposition, although short, was in fact filed. The court will proceed to rule on the
motion at this time.
With respect to the three categories of examination, defendant previously produced Celynn Womack as its PMQ
for category of examination 1 only and did not produce any person as its PMQ for categories of examination 2 or 3.
Provided the deposition notice served on the entity describes the matters on which questions are to be asked
"with reasonable particularity," the entity "shall designate and produce" the officers, directors, managing agents or
employees "most qualified to testify on its behalf as to those matters to the extent of any information known or
reasonably available to the deponent." (CCP 2025.230)
The court has reviewed the categories for examination in Plaintiffs' deposition notice and finds that categories of
examination nos. 2 and 3 were stated with reasonable particularity. Defendant is ordered to produce the person
most qualified to testify on its behalf as to any "information known or reasonably available to the deponent" (CCP
section 2025.230) for categories of examination nos. 2 and 3. Such deposition shall commence within 60 days of
today's date at a place at a time to be mutually agreed upon and to be re-noticed by plaintiff. The court expects
the parties to mutually cooperate in agreeing upon a date, time and place for deposition.
With respect to the three document requests, plaintiff sought "All DOCUMENTS reasonably related" to payments
made to decedent at different times. At the deposition of Celynn Womack as PMQ for Harold Crawford, an
accounts payable ledger was produced as the only responsive document for RFPD no. 1. Plaintiff argues that Ms.
Womack testified that there are other documents reasonably relating to the request in Harold Crawford's
possession, custody or control, such as tax documents generated for payments to Carmen, including.
Tax documents are not specifically described in the document requests and the category is not reasonably
particularized such that it would be obvious that tax documents are sought. "All DOCUMENTS reasonably related"
is an overly broad description, making it virtually impossible to determine what responsive documents would be
expected to be produced. The court sustains defendant's overly broad and not reasonably particularized objections
to requests for documents nos. 1, 2 and 3. No further response or document production is ordered at this time.
This order is without prejudice to plaintiff being allowed to serve more specifically worded document requests
with the re-notice of the PMQ deposition for categories of examination nos. 2 and 3 discussed above.
Defense counsel's oral request to Stay - Denied.
Answer and/or Cross-Complaint to be filed and served by 08/11/2021.
Deposition to be done within sixty (60) days at a time and place mutually agreed upon.
Case management conference continued to 10/22/2021, at 8:15 a.m., in Department 17.
(See reporter's transcript for full ruling)
Counsel for Defendant to prepare order for signature pursuant to CRC 3.1312. In the meantime, the clerk's
minutes will be the order of the court.
Further notice waived.
MINUTES
Page 2 of 3
JAMES WELCH AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ESTATE OF BCV-20-100434
CARMEN J. HADLEY VS HAROLD CRAWFORD CO., INC.
FUTURE HEARINGS:
July 30, 2021 10:30 AM Voluntary Settlement Conference
Bakersfield Department 10
Barmann, Bernard C., Jr.
October 22, 2021 8:15 AM Case Management Conference
Clark, Thomas S.
Bakersfield Department 17
Sheriff, Deputy
MINUTES FINALIZED BY: LINDA HALL ON: 7/19/2021
MINUTES
Page 3 of 3
JAMES WELCH AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ESTATE OF BCV-20-100434
CARMEN J. HADLEY VS HAROLD CRAWFORD CO., INC.
Document Filed Date
October 22, 2021
Case Filing Date
February 12, 2020
Category
06-CV Breach of Contract/Warranty-Civil Unlimited
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Preview
Superior Court of California County of Kern Bakersfield Department 17 Hearing Date: 07/19/2021 Time: 8:30 AM - 12:00 PM JAMES WELCH AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ESTATE OF CARMEN J. HADLEY VS HAROLD CRAWFORD CO., INC. BCV-20-100434 Honorable: Thomas S. Clark Clerk: Linda K. Hall Court Reporter: VICTORIA A. SANCHEZ Bailiff: Deputy Sheriff Interpreter: Language Of: PARTIES: Present: JAMES WELCH AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE DANIELS, WILLIAM A Attorney, Present FOR THE ESTATE OF CARMEN J. HADLEY Plaintiff, Not Present HAROLD CRAWFORD CO., INC. Defendant, Not DODGIN, DUSTIN S Attorney, Present Present NATURE OF PROCEEDINGS: MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER DISCOVERY RESPONSES DEMURRER, MOTION TO STRIKE, CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE Hearing Start Time: 8:57 AM The above entitled cause came on regularly on this date and time with parties and/or counsel appearing as reflected above. The Court appoints Victoria A. Sanchez from the Pro Tempore list as the Official Court Reporter for Motions. Oath on file. Matter argued by counsel and submitted. The Court makes the following findings and orders: Defendant's Demurrer to Second Amended Complaint - Overruled. Defendant's Motion to Strike - Denied. Plaintiff's Motion To Compel Defendant The Harold Crawford Company, Inc.'s Further Responses To Deposition Of The Harold Crawford Company, Inc.'s Person Most Qualified And Request For Production Of Documents - Granted in part / Denied in part. MINUTES Page 1 of 3 JAMES WELCH AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ESTATE OF BCV-20-100434 CARMEN J. HADLEY VS HAROLD CRAWFORD CO., INC. The court declines to continue the hearing on this motion again as requested by the opposing defendant. This motion was filed on 12/03/20 and has been continued several times, giving defendant plenty of time to craft any opposition it deemed fit and an opposition, although short, was in fact filed. The court will proceed to rule on the motion at this time. With respect to the three categories of examination, defendant previously produced Celynn Womack as its PMQ for category of examination 1 only and did not produce any person as its PMQ for categories of examination 2 or 3. Provided the deposition notice served on the entity describes the matters on which questions are to be asked "with reasonable particularity," the entity "shall designate and produce" the officers, directors, managing agents or employees "most qualified to testify on its behalf as to those matters to the extent of any information known or reasonably available to the deponent." (CCP 2025.230) The court has reviewed the categories for examination in Plaintiffs' deposition notice and finds that categories of examination nos. 2 and 3 were stated with reasonable particularity. Defendant is ordered to produce the person most qualified to testify on its behalf as to any "information known or reasonably available to the deponent" (CCP section 2025.230) for categories of examination nos. 2 and 3. Such deposition shall commence within 60 days of today's date at a place at a time to be mutually agreed upon and to be re-noticed by plaintiff. The court expects the parties to mutually cooperate in agreeing upon a date, time and place for deposition. With respect to the three document requests, plaintiff sought "All DOCUMENTS reasonably related" to payments made to decedent at different times. At the deposition of Celynn Womack as PMQ for Harold Crawford, an accounts payable ledger was produced as the only responsive document for RFPD no. 1. Plaintiff argues that Ms. Womack testified that there are other documents reasonably relating to the request in Harold Crawford's possession, custody or control, such as tax documents generated for payments to Carmen, including. Tax documents are not specifically described in the document requests and the category is not reasonably particularized such that it would be obvious that tax documents are sought. "All DOCUMENTS reasonably related" is an overly broad description, making it virtually impossible to determine what responsive documents would be expected to be produced. The court sustains defendant's overly broad and not reasonably particularized objections to requests for documents nos. 1, 2 and 3. No further response or document production is ordered at this time. This order is without prejudice to plaintiff being allowed to serve more specifically worded document requests with the re-notice of the PMQ deposition for categories of examination nos. 2 and 3 discussed above. Defense counsel's oral request to Stay - Denied. Answer and/or Cross-Complaint to be filed and served by 08/11/2021. Deposition to be done within sixty (60) days at a time and place mutually agreed upon. Case management conference continued to 10/22/2021, at 8:15 a.m., in Department 17. (See reporter's transcript for full ruling) Counsel for Defendant to prepare order for signature pursuant to CRC 3.1312. In the meantime, the clerk's minutes will be the order of the court. Further notice waived. MINUTES Page 2 of 3 JAMES WELCH AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ESTATE OF BCV-20-100434 CARMEN J. HADLEY VS HAROLD CRAWFORD CO., INC. FUTURE HEARINGS: July 30, 2021 10:30 AM Voluntary Settlement Conference Bakersfield Department 10 Barmann, Bernard C., Jr. October 22, 2021 8:15 AM Case Management Conference Clark, Thomas S. Bakersfield Department 17 Sheriff, Deputy MINUTES FINALIZED BY: LINDA HALL ON: 7/19/2021 MINUTES Page 3 of 3 JAMES WELCH AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ESTATE OF BCV-20-100434 CARMEN J. HADLEY VS HAROLD CRAWFORD CO., INC.