Superior Court of California
County of Los Angeles
Southwest District
Torrance Dept. M
MUHAMMAD L. KHAN, et al. Plaintiffs,
Case No.: YC071971 vs. [Tentative] RULING
PENNYMAC CORP., et al., Defendants.
Hearing Date: August 18, 2020
Moving Parties: Defendant PennyMac Loan Services, LLC
Responding Party: Plaintiffs Farida Khanum and Muhammad Khan
As to Farida Khanum
1. Motion to Compel Further Responses of Farida Khanum to Form Interrogatories, Set One.
As to Muhammad Khan
2. Motion to Compel Further Responses of Muhammad Khan to Form Interrogatories, Set One.
The court considered the moving papers.
RULING
The motions are GRANTED, in part.
Defendant PennyMac Loan’s Motion to Compel Further Responses to its Form Interrogatories, Set One, from Farida Khanum Nos. 2.5 – 2.7, 6.2 – 6.6, 7.1, 8.7 – 8.8, 9.2, 10.1, 11.2, 14.1 – 14.2, 50.1, and 50.3, is GRANTED. The motion is DENIED as to Nos. 9.1, 10.2, 10.3, and 50.4. Plaintiff Farida Khanum is ordered to serve further respons
Hearing Date
August 18, 2020
Type
Other Real Property (not eminent domain, landlord/tenant, foreclosure) (General Jurisdiction)
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Superior Court of California
County of Los Angeles
Southwest District
Torrance Dept. M
MUHAMMAD L. KHAN, et al. Plaintiffs,
Case No.: YC071971 vs. [Tentative] RULING
PENNYMAC CORP., et al., Defendants.
Hearing Date: August 18, 2020
Moving Parties: Defendant PennyMac Loan Services, LLC
Responding Party: Plaintiffs Farida Khanum and Muhammad Khan
As to Farida Khanum
1. Motion to Compel Further Responses of Farida Khanum to Form Interrogatories, Set One.
As to Muhammad Khan
2. Motion to Compel Further Responses of Muhammad Khan to Form Interrogatories, Set One.
The court considered the moving papers.
RULING
The motions are GRANTED, in part.
Defendant PennyMac Loan’s Motion to Compel Further Responses to its Form Interrogatories, Set One, from Farida Khanum Nos. 2.5 – 2.7, 6.2 – 6.6, 7.1, 8.7 – 8.8, 9.2, 10.1, 11.2, 14.1 – 14.2, 50.1, and 50.3, is GRANTED. The motion is DENIED as to Nos. 9.1, 10.2, 10.3, and 50.4. Plaintiff Farida Khanum is ordered to serve further respons