Judge: James A. Mangione, Case: 37-2023-00024866-CU-BC-CTL, Date: 2024-03-29 Tentative Ruling

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,

DEPT.:

EVENT DATE:

EVENT TIME:

HALL OF JUSTICE

TENTATIVE RULINGS - March 28, 2024

03/29/2024  09:00:00 AM  C-75 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

JUDICIAL OFFICER:James A Mangione

CASE NO.:

CASE CATEGORY:

EVENT TYPE:

CASE TITLE: CASE TYPE:

Civil - Unlimited  Breach of Contract/Warranty Discovery Hearing 37-2023-00024866-CU-BC-CTL ESPARZA VS GENERAL MOTORS LLC [IMAGED] CAUSAL DOCUMENT/DATE FILED:

Plaintiff Mario Esparza's Motion to Compel Further Responses to Requests for Production of Documents Nos. 1-3, 9, 14-16, 31-33 and 37-51 is granted in part.

Defendant's responses to Request for Production of Document Nos. 1-3, 9 and 14-16 contain objections and a statement that Defendant will comply in part. Excepting privilege, the Court overrules Defendant's objections to these requests and orders supplemental responses complying in full. Any documents withheld on the basis of privilege must be identified via a privilege log.

The Court sustains Defendant's objections to Request for Production of Document Nos. 31-33 as overly burdensome and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Therefore, Plaintiff's request for supplemental responses is denied as to these requests.

The Court overrules Defendant's objections to Request for Production of Document Nos. 37-51 and orders supplemental responses complying with the request in full.

Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Further Responses to Form Interrogatory Nos. 1.1, 12.1, 15.1, and 17.1 is granted in part.

The Court finds that Defendant's response to Form Interrogatory No. 1.1 is code-compliant and denies Plaintiff's request to compel a further response. The Court finds that Defendant's responses to Form Interrogatory Nos. 12.1, 15.1 and 17.1 are evasive and incomplete and grants Plaintiff's request to compel further responses.

Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Further Responses to Special Interrogatory Nos. 14, 40-45 and 53 is granted.

The Court finds that Defendant's responses to Special Interrogatory Nos. 14, 42-45 and 53 are not code-compliant and orders Defendant to provide supplemental responses. Additionally, the Court finds that Defendant's responses to Special Interrogatory Nos. 40-41 are insufficient but finds the requests to be overbroad in scope and/or time. Therefore, Defendant's supplemental responses are limited to the individual supervising vehicle repurchases in the San Diego area during the time between the purchase of the subject vehicle and the date the lawsuit was filed.

Supplemental responses are due within fourteen (14) days.

The minute order is the order of the Court.

Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

3085531  7 CASE NUMBER: CASE TITLE:  ESPARZA VS GENERAL MOTORS LLC [IMAGED]  37-2023-00024866-CU-BC-CTL Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

3085531  7