Motion: Compel Compliance with Demands for Physical
Examinations of each Plaintiff
Tentative Ruling:
To deny the motion without prejudice. Defendant did not comply with Local Rule 2.1.17.
Explanation:
Background
Plaintiffs are husband and wife. They rented an apartment at the Manchester Townhomes. The property is managed by Defendant WA Funding, Inc. dba Regency Property Management. The apartment had a pest infestation. Plaintiffs reported the problem to the property management. Defendant WA Funding had a contract with Defendant Castech Pest Services for pest control.
On November 4, 2013, Castech sent its employee, Defendant Mitch Conroy to the Plaintiffs’ apartment to “fog it.” For reasons unknown, Conroy did not apply the proper pesticide. Instead, he mistakenly applied a pesticide known as Cyper TC. He did not leave the mandatory notice informing the Plaintiffs of the type of chemical applied. Plaintiffs allege that when they returned to the apartment on November 4, 2013, they and t
Hearing Date
October 17, 2016
Type
23 Unlimited - Other PI/PD/WD
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Motion: Compel Compliance with Demands for Physical
Examinations of each Plaintiff
Tentative Ruling:
To deny the motion without prejudice. Defendant did not comply with Local Rule 2.1.17.
Explanation:
Background
Plaintiffs are husband and wife. They rented an apartment at the Manchester Townhomes. The property is managed by Defendant WA Funding, Inc. dba Regency Property Management. The apartment had a pest infestation. Plaintiffs reported the problem to the property management. Defendant WA Funding had a contract with Defendant Castech Pest Services for pest control.
On November 4, 2013, Castech sent its employee, Defendant Mitch Conroy to the Plaintiffs’ apartment to “fog it.” For reasons unknown, Conroy did not apply the proper pesticide. Instead, he mistakenly applied a pesticide known as Cyper TC. He did not leave the mandatory notice informing the Plaintiffs of the type of chemical applied. Plaintiffs allege that when they returned to the apartment on November 4, 2013, they and t