Judge: Lisa R. Jaskol, Case: 22STCV30659, Date: 2025-06-05 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 22STCV30659 Hearing Date: June 5, 2025 Dept: 28
Having considered the moving, opposition, and reply papers, the Court rules as follows.
BACKGROUND
On September 20, 2022, Plaintiff Douglas Gray (“Plaintiff”) filed this action again Defendants Kim Phan and Does 1-25 for motor vehicle tort and general negligence.
On March 26, 2024, Defendant Kim Anh Phan (“Defendant”) filed an answer.
On February 7, 2025, Defendant filed a motion to compel Plaintiff to produce his vehicle for inspection and for sanctions. The motion was set for hearing on April 9, 2025. On March 26, 2025, Plaintiff filed an opposition. On April 2, 2025, Defendant filed a reply. The Court continued the hearing to June 5, 2025.
Trial is scheduled for November 12, 2025.
PARTIES’ REQUESTS
Defendant asks the Court to compel Plaintiff to produce his vehicle for inspection and to impose sanctions on Plaintiff.
Plaintiff
asks the Court to deny the motion and impose sanctions on Defendant.
DISCUSSION
As noted, on February 7, 2025, Defendant filed a motion to compel Plaintiff to produce Plaintiff’s vehicle for inspection. However, Defendant did not file a declaration supporting the motion’s factual assertions or authenticating the documents attached to the motion.
In Plaintiff’s March 26, 2025 opposition to Defendant’s motion, Plaintiff noted that Defendant had failed to provide a supporting declaration.
On April 2, 2025, along with Defendant’s reply, Defendant for the first time filed a declaration supporting the motion.
Because Plaintiff has already filed his opposition, Plaintiff has not had an opportunity to address Defendant’s April 2, 2025 declaration supporting the motion. It would be unfair to decide the motion under these circumstances. The Court therefore denies Defendant’s motion without prejudice.
The Court denies both parties’ requests for sanctions without prejudice.
CONCLUSION
The Court DENIES without prejudice Defendant Kim Anh Phan’s motion to compel Plaintiff Douglas Gray to produce his vehicle for inspection and for sanctions.
The Court DENIES without prejudice Plaintiff Douglas Gray’s request for sanctions.
Moving party is ordered to give notice of this ruling.
Moving party is ordered to file the proof of service of this ruling with the Court within five days.