Judge: Mark E. Windham, Case: 21VECV01737, Date: 2024-03-05 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21VECV01737    Hearing Date: April 15, 2024    Dept: 26

Zvard Artemyan v. Yervand Azizyan, et al.

Defendant’s Motion for Leave to Conduct Additional Discovery

(CCP § 95)

TENTATIVE RULING: GRANT


Background

            On December 20, 2021, Zvard Artemyan (Plaintiff) filed a Complaint containing nine causes of action against Yervan Azizyan and Emilya Papoyan (collectively Defendants) stemming from a landlord-tenant dispute. The case was initially classified as unlimited; however, it was reclassified to limited.

            The motion now before the Court is Defendants’ Motion for Leave to Conduct Additional Discovery (the Motion). The Motion is unopposed. 

Discussion

Legal Standard

            The court may, on noticed motion and subject to such terms and conditions as are just, authorize a party to conduct additional discovery, but only upon a showing that the moving party will be unable to prosecute or defend the action effectively without the additional discovery. In making a determination under this section, the court shall take into account whether the moving party has used all applicable discovery in good faith, and whether the party has attempted to secure the additional discovery by stipulation or by means other than formal discovery. (CCP § 95.)

Analysis

            The Court will grant the Motion as Defendants have demonstrated that they will only be able to effectively defend against the suit if additional discovery is allowed. Plaintiff filed a Complaint containing the following causes of action:

1.      Illegally Holding Security Deposit - Violation of CCP § 1950(g)(1)

2.      Retaliation

3.      Breach of the Covenant of Quiet Enjoyment

4.      Breach of Contract

5.      Illegally Entering the Property - Violation of CCP § 1954(d)(1)

6.      Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress

7.      Harassment

8.      Breach of the Implied Covenant of Good Faith & Fair Dealing

9.      Promissory Estoppel

            The Complaint is twenty pages long and requests statutory, compensatory, and punitive damages. Defendants contend that they will not be able to properly defend themselves in this suit when limited to the statutorily prescribed 35 interrogatories, demands to produce documents, or requests for admissions (CCP § 94.) The Court agrees.

            The nine causes of action alleged against Defendants make for a formidable suit. Moreover, it appears that all discovery conducted thus far has been done in good faith, and Defendants attempted to secure additional discovery by stipulation, but to no avail. Defendants were left with no other choice but to either rely on insufficient discovery or file this Motion. Accordingly, the Motion is granted.

Conclusion

            Defendants’ Motion for Leave to Conduct Additional Discovery pursuant to CCP § 95 is GRANTED.

Moving party to give notice.