Judge: Cynthia A Freeland, Case: 37-2023-00005945-CU-CR-NC, Date: 2023-10-20 Tentative Ruling

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,

DEPT.:

EVENT DATE:

EVENT TIME:

SOUTH BUILDING TENTATIVE RULINGS - October 19, 2023

10/20/2023  01:30:00 PM  N-27 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

JUDICIAL OFFICER:Cynthia A. Freeland

CASE NO.:

CASE CATEGORY:

EVENT TYPE:

CASE TITLE: CASE TYPE:

Civil - Unlimited  Civil Rights Motion Hearing (Civil) 37-2023-00005945-CU-CR-NC FRYE VS. FORE THE LADIES LLC [IMAGED] CAUSAL DOCUMENT/DATE FILED: Motion - Other, 09/27/2023

Plaintiffs Steve Frye and Alex Maystrenko (collectively, 'Plaintiffs')'s motion for an order permitting discovery of facts and documents at issue in Defendants Fore the Ladies, Inc. and Abby Liebenthal (collectively, 'Defendants')'s anti-SLAPP motion is denied.

California Code of Civil Procedure ('CCP') § 425.16(g) provides that: All discovery proceedings in the action shall be stayed upon the filing of a notice of motion made pursuant to this section. The stay of discovery shall remain in effect until notice of entry of the order ruling on the motion. The court, on noticed motion and for good cause shown, may order that specified discovery be conducted notwithstanding this subdivision.

Cal. Code Civ. P. § 425.16(g).

'In enacting section 425.16, 'not only did the Legislature desire early resolution to minimize the potential costs of protracted litigation, it also sought to protect defendants from the burden of traditional discovery pending resolution of the motion.'' Britts v. Sup. Ct. (2006) 145 Cal. App. 4th 1112, 1124 (quoting Mattel, Inc. v. Luce, Forward, Hamilton & Scripps (2002) 99 Cal. App. 4th 1179, 1190). To establish good cause under CCP § 425.16(g), the moving party must demonstrate 'that a defendant or witness possesses evidence needed by plaintiff to establish a prima facie case.' Lafayette Morehouse, Inc. v. Chronicle Publishing Co. (1995) 37 Cal. App. 4th 855, 868. This should include an explanation of 'what additional facts [plaintiff] expects to uncover . . . .' Sipple v. Foundation for Nat. Progress (1999) 71 Cal. App. 4th 226, 247. See also Abir Cohen Treyzon Salo, LLP v. Lahiji (2019) 40 Cal. App. 5th 882, 891 ('A trial court may lift the statutory stay for 'good cause' . . . which requires a showing that the specific discovery sought is both 'needed ... to establish a prima facie case' and 'tailored to that end.''). However, '[d]iscovery may not be obtained merely to 'test' the opponent's declarations.' 1-800 Contacts, Inc. v. Steinberg (2003) 107 Cal. App. 4th 568, 593.

On February 8, 2023, Plaintiffs commenced this action by filing a Complaint against Defendants and others for: (1) violation of California Civil Code § 51 (the Unruh Civil Rights Act), and (2) violation of California Civil Code § 51.5. See ROA No. 1. On September 18, 2023, Defendants filed their anti-SLAPP motion which effectuated a stay of discovery in this proceeding under CCP § 425.16(g). See ROA No.

33. Plaintiffs now seek an order permitting them to obtain discovery on various categories of information which they claim disprove Defendants' claims in their anti-SLAPP motion that: (1) Defendants are not a business establishment for purposes of California's anti-discrimination laws, and (2) Defendants have a socially beneficial purpose, supported by public policy, to exclude men and non-binary persons from golf Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

3030361 CASE NUMBER: CASE TITLE:  FRYE VS. FORE THE LADIES LLC [IMAGED]  37-2023-00005945-CU-CR-NC clinics, cocktail hours, and shopping experiences because men are purportedly intimidating and judgmental at golf courses.

The court finds that Plaintiffs have failed to demonstrate good cause for an order permitting the discovery they seek. Notably, while Plaintiffs identify four categories of discovery they wish to obtain, they fail to explain how the discovery is relevant to the issues that Defendants have raised in their anti-SLAPP motion. Nor have Plaintiffs indicated how those categories are narrowly tailored to establish their prima facie case or what specific discovery tools they will need (except for the more general assertion that they will need 'to conduct written discovery and depositions . . . .'). Indeed, Plaintiffs implicitly concede by way of their reply that the initially proposed categories of discovery were not narrowly tailored given that Plaintiffs essentially limit and redraft the categories of discovery they purport to need to respond to the pending anti-SLAPP motion. Moreover, Plaintiffs have failed to establish that the requested discovery, even as limited in the reply, is relevant to the anti-SLAPP motion. Plaintiffs seek discovery, as limited by the reply, on the following categories: (1) the partnership agreement and revenue sharing between Defendants Fore the Ladies, Inc. and Abby Liebenthal and Defendant Goat Hill Park, LLC for the subject event; and (2) limited discovery of the partnership agreements and share of the proceeds for the merchandise sold at the subject event.

However, these activities are not germane to determining whether Fore the Ladies, Inc. is a business establishment under the Unruh Civil Rights Act. Even if this evidence were relevant, Plaintiffs admit that they already have access to the information by way of Defendants' website. Moreover, to the extent Plaintiffs proffer a new theory in their reply to purportedly justify the proposed, limited discovery, the court is not persuaded that Plaintiffs have demonstrated the requisite good cause.

In light of the foregoing, the court denies Plaintiffs' motion for an order permitting discovery of facts and documents at issue in Defendants' anti-SLAPP motion.

This is the tentative ruling for the hearing at 1:30 p.m. on Friday, October 20, 2023. If no party appears at the hearing, this tentative ruling will become the order of the court as of October 20, 2023. If the parties are satisfied with the court's tentative ruling or do not otherwise wish to argue the motion, they are encouraged to give notice to the court and each other of their intention not to appear, though this notice is not required.

Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

3030361