Judge: Joel R Wohlfeil, Case: 37-2023-00044968-CU-NP-CTL, Date: 2024-05-30 Tentative Ruling

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,

DEPT.:

EVENT DATE:

EVENT TIME:

HALL OF JUSTICE

TENTATIVE RULINGS - May 29, 2024

05/30/2024  01:30:00 PM  C-73 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

JUDICIAL OFFICER:Joel R. Wohlfeil

CASE NO.:

CASE CATEGORY:

EVENT TYPE:

CASE TITLE: CASE TYPE:

Civil - Unlimited  Non-PI/PD/WD tort - Other Discovery Hearing 37-2023-00044968-CU-NP-CTL SMITH VS HASANNAEIMI [IMAGED] CAUSAL DOCUMENT/DATE FILED: Motion for Protective Order, 05/06/2024

1. The Motion (ROA # 68) of Defendant SJF VENTURES, INC. ('Defendant' or 'SJF') for a protective order that the thousand seventy-one (1,071) Special Interrogatories (Set One) propounded on SJF by Plaintiff Atiya Smith ('Plaintiff') on April 28, 2024, need not be answered, and for monetary sanctions, is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.

The Court has read and considered Plaintiffs' Complaint - ROA # 1 - Defendant's Answer - ROA # 10 - Defendant's First Cross- Complaint - ROA # 17 - the Answer by Defendant SJF Ventures Inc. dba San Diego Premier Property Management - ROA # 13 - and Plaintiffs and Cross-Defendants' Answer to the First Amended Cross-Complaint (ROA # 65).

The Motion for a protective is GRANTED. Though the information requested appears to be relevant or reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence, the Court agrees with Defendant that the interrogatory set, as a whole, is oppressive, unduly burdensome and expensive, and unreasonably cumulative or duplicative.

The Motion for sanctions is GRANTED IN PART. Defendant's proposal to negotiate a compromise during the meet and confer process was reasonable. Plaintiffs can obtain the necessary discovery without demanding responses to more than 1,000 interrogatories. Plaintiffs' position is without substantial justification. Attorney's hourly rate is reasonable. The services, as limited, are reasonable and necessary. Plaintiff only is directed to pay total sanctions of $1,700.

Plaintiff's counter request for sanctions is DENIED. Defendant has not acted without substantial justification.

_____ 2. The Motion (ROA # 71) of Defendant and Cross-Complainant VAHID HASANNAEIMI ('Defendant' or 'Hasannaeimi') for a protective order that the five hundred twenty-five (525) Special Interrogatories (Set One) propounded on Hasannaeimi by Plaintiff Atiya Smith ('Plaintiff') on April 28, 2024, and for monetary sanctions, is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.

The Court has read and considered Plaintiffs' Complaint - ROA # 1 - Defendant's Answer - ROA # 10 - Defendant's First Cross- Complaint - ROA # 17 - the Answer by Defendant SJF Ventures Inc. dba San Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

3126573  7 CASE NUMBER: CASE TITLE:  SMITH VS HASANNAEIMI [IMAGED]  37-2023-00044968-CU-NP-CTL Diego Premier Property Management - ROA # 13 - and Plaintiffs and Cross-Defendants' Answer to the First Amended Cross-Complaint (ROA # 65).

The Motion for a protective is GRANTED. Though the information requested appears to be relevant or reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence, the Court agrees with Defendant that the interrogatory set, as a whole, is oppressive, unduly burdensome and expensive, and unreasonably cumulative or duplicative.

The Motion for sanctions is GRANTED IN PART. Defendant's proposal to negotiate a compromise during the meet and confer process was reasonable. Plaintiffs can obtain the necessary discovery without demanding responses to more than 500 interrogatories. Plaintiffs' position is without substantial justification. Attorney's hourly rate is reasonable. The services, as limited, are reasonable and necessary. Plaintiff only is directed to pay total sanctions of $325.

Plaintiff's counter request for sanctions is DENIED. Defendant has not acted without substantial justification.

Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

3126573  7