LEXUS ROGERS; Plaintiff, vs. CC VENICE LLC, et al.; Defendants.
Case No.: BC 721637
Hearing Date: December 10, 2019
[TENTATIVE] RULING RE:
Defendant CC Venice, LLC’s Motion to Compel FURTHER answers to questions at deposition of Plaintiff Lexus Rogers
PLAINTIFF LEXUS ROGERS’ MOTION TO COMPEL DEFENDANT CC VENICE, LLC’S FURTHER RESPONSES AND PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS TO WRITTEN DISCOVERY
DEFENDANT CC VENICE, LLC’S MOTION FOR TERMINATING SANCTIONS AGAINST PLAINTIFF LEXUS ROGERS AND HER COUNSEL
Defendant CC Venice, LLC’s Motion for Terminating Sanctions is DENIED. Rogers is ordered to provide supplemental responses without objections to Request for Production, Set One, Nos. 5, 8, 14, 15, and 17 within 10 days of this order and to pay CC $4,560 in sanctions.
Defendant CC Venice, LLC’s Motion to Compel Further Deposition Responses is GRANTED.
Plaintiff Rogers’ Motion to Compel Further Responses with respect to Form Interrogatory No. 4.1 is DENIED. The Motion to Compel Further is GRANT
Hearing Date
December 10, 2019
Type
Civil Rights/Discrimination (General Jurisdiction)
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
LEXUS ROGERS; Plaintiff, vs. CC VENICE LLC, et al.; Defendants.
Case No.: BC 721637
Hearing Date: December 10, 2019
[TENTATIVE] RULING RE:
Defendant CC Venice, LLC’s Motion to Compel FURTHER answers to questions at deposition of Plaintiff Lexus Rogers
PLAINTIFF LEXUS ROGERS’ MOTION TO COMPEL DEFENDANT CC VENICE, LLC’S FURTHER RESPONSES AND PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS TO WRITTEN DISCOVERY
DEFENDANT CC VENICE, LLC’S MOTION FOR TERMINATING SANCTIONS AGAINST PLAINTIFF LEXUS ROGERS AND HER COUNSEL
Defendant CC Venice, LLC’s Motion for Terminating Sanctions is DENIED. Rogers is ordered to provide supplemental responses without objections to Request for Production, Set One, Nos. 5, 8, 14, 15, and 17 within 10 days of this order and to pay CC $4,560 in sanctions.
Defendant CC Venice, LLC’s Motion to Compel Further Deposition Responses is GRANTED.
Plaintiff Rogers’ Motion to Compel Further Responses with respect to Form Interrogatory No. 4.1 is DENIED. The Motion to Compel Further is GRANT