Judge: Martha K. Gooding, Case: 2020-01176479, Date: 2022-09-12 Tentative Ruling

Motion for Summary Judgment and/or Adjudication

In order to rule on the substance of the Motion by Defendant Bohm Wildish & Matsen, LLP (“Defendant”) for Summary Judgment on Plaintiff Donald Hecht’s’ First Amended Complaint (“FAC”), the Court needs clarification from Defendant’s counsel regarding the Declaration of Sherry Graybehl D’Antony (the “D’Antony Declaration”)[ROA #123] filed in support of the Motion. 

There are three exhibits to the D’Antony Declaration, which are designated exhibits P, Q, and R.  Exhibit Q to the D’Antony Declaration is a redacted copy of Plaintiff’s 10/6/14 post-nuptial agreement with Spouse.  There is a Notice of Lodging that states the unredacted Exhibit Q is being filed conditionally under seal.  [ROA #133.]  But Exhibit Q is not attached to the Notice of Lodging.  There also is a cover sheet for confidential information.  [ROA #121.]  But Exhibit Q is not attached to that either.  It appears to the Court that Defendant has not submitted an unredacted copy of Exhibit Q, the 10/6/14 post-nuptial agreement.

In addition, nowhere in its Memorandum or Separate Statement does Defendant cite to the D’Antony Declaration Exhibits P, Q, or R.  Rather, Defendant cites to the D’Antony Declaration, Exhibits A, B, or C.  But, as noted, there are no Exhibits A, B or C to the D’Antony Declaration.

The Court is tentatively inclined to continue the hearing on the Motion to permit only (1) the necessary corrected citations to be provided; (2) the unredacted Exhibit Q to be lodged conditionally under seal pursuant to the procedures in CRC 2.550; and (3) a motion to seal to be filed, as it appears no such motion has been filed.  The Court will hear from the parties on that potential course of action and its impact on the trial date, which is currently set for October 17, 2022.