Judge: Ronald F. Frank, Case: 22STCV05691, Date: 2023-07-20 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV05691    Hearing Date: July 20, 2023    Dept: 8

Tentative Ruling¿¿ 

¿¿¿ 

HEARING DATE:                    July 20, 2023

¿¿¿ 

CASE NUMBER:                   22STCV05691

¿¿¿ 

CASE NAME:                        Erik Avner v. CB, LLC, et al.

¿¿¿ 

MOVING PARTY:                   Plaintiff, Erik Avner

¿¿¿ 

RESPONDING PARTY:        Defendants, Signature Farms, The Vons Companies, and Albertson Companies, Inc. 

TRIAL DATE:                           July 22, 2024

¿¿¿ 

MOTION:¿                                  (1) Motion for Order Compelling Plaintiff’s Responses to Form Interrogatories

                                                (2) Motion for Order Compelling Plaintiff’s  Responses to Special Interrogatories

                                                (3) Motion for Order Compelling Plaintiff’s  Responses to Production of Evidence

                                                (4) Request for Sanctions

¿¿ 

Tentative Rulings:                      (1) Discuss.  The state of the record appears to indicate that defense counsel only provided verifications for Von’s discovery responses, not for Albertsons nor Signature, and that Signature does not even exist as an entity (even though the Signature name appears on many products sold in grocery stores).  But defense counsel answered for all 3 entities, and filed a CMC statement on behalf of all 3 entities AFTER Ms. Low’s declaration states she told Plaintiff’s counsel that Signature did not exist and thus she inadvertently had answered for Signature.  Von’s ultimately provided verifications but Albertson’s did not and Signature did not, mooting the motions to compel as to Von’s but not mooting the sanctions even as to Von’s

                                                (2) Ditto

                                                (3) Ditto

                                                (4) GRANTED in the amount of $500 for each of the 3 motions as to Von’s and its counsel, payable within 30 days.  Discuss as to the other two entities.  The Court will set an OSC re sanctions as against defense counsel for including Signature as its client on pleadings filed with the Court even after the date when counsel advised plaintiff that counsel had mistakenly answered for a non-existent entity, and for failing to meaningfully address in the Low declaration the months and months delay in providing Von’s verification even after three motions were filed