Plaintiffs’ Joint Motion to Reopen Discovery – GRANTED.
Based on review of the moving and opposing papers and evidence, the Court finds that Plaintiffs have made a sufficient showing based on the factors enumerated in Code Civ. Proc. §2024.050 to warrant reopening discovery for a limited purpose. The necessity and reasons for the discovery go to facts in support of their claims, including fraud claims, and defendant’s admission at deposition that some of the interrogatory responses were not accurate. Plaintiffs were dilatory in bringing the motion by waiting until ten days before the discovery cut off to depose defendant’s PMQ, and then delaying to file its motion, such that it would have been heard less than 30 days before trial. However, the new trial date eliminates any concern of delay of that trial due to the granting of this motion. Moreover, defendant is not blameless. Defendant failed to produce witnesses most qualified for some of the 35 categories outlined in the deposition n