Judge: Ronald F. Frazier, Case: 37-2021-00021672-CU-MC-CTL, Date: 2023-09-07 Tentative Ruling

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,

DEPT.:

EVENT DATE:

EVENT TIME:

HALL OF JUSTICE

TENTATIVE RULINGS - August 24, 2023

08/25/2023  08:30:00 AM  C-65 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

JUDICIAL OFFICER:Ronald F. Frazier

CASE NO.:

CASE CATEGORY:

EVENT TYPE:

CASE TITLE: CASE TYPE:

Civil - Unlimited  Misc Complaints - Other Discovery Hearing 37-2021-00021672-CU-MC-CTL THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA VS GOLDEN [IMAGED] CAUSAL DOCUMENT/DATE FILED: Motion - Other, 08/01/2023

Defendant Lisa Golden's Motion to Compel Discovery Responses from Receiver Neil Scheaffer and Griswold Law Office, and Contractor Leisah Hall; for Appearance of Hall at Deposition and Demand for Return of Missing/Stolen Property from Residence; Sanctions for Non-Compliance with Subpoena is ordered off calendar. (ROA 917.) Once again, Defendant has failed to properly serve her moving and reply papers, and has not filed a proper proof of service as to any parties or as to the non-party deponents who are the subjects of her motion. As the court has explained to Defendant many times, the court cannot consider Defendant's motion papers if they have not been properly served.

Defendant did file two purported proofs of service which may be related to this motion. (ROA 929, 930.) A proof of service 'must be filed no later than five court days before the time appointed for hearing.' (Cal. R. Court, rule 3.1300(c).) Both documents were filed on August 21, 2023, less than five days prior to this hearing.

The first proof of service (ROA 929) fails to identify who was served (form POS-040 at ¶ 5(a)) or how service was achieved (Id at ¶ 6). It also indicates Defendant is the person who served the documents even though the first paragraph of the form requires the person serving the documents to declare under penalty of perjury they are 'not a party to the action.' (Id. at ¶ 1, bold in original). The proof of service lacks a signature.

The second proof of service (ROA 929) states 'Leisah Hall, TLC Xtreme Clean' is the person served, and further that service was achieved by mail. However, because Hall is not a party to the action, Defendant was required to personally serve her with the moving papers. Even if mail service had been appropriate, the service would have been untimely. (August 25, 2023 hearing date – 16 court days – 5 days for mailing = July 29, 2023.) This proof of service identifies the declarant as 'J. Price' but also lacks a signature.

Further, the court notes Defendant's memorandum and the document labeled as a declaration indicate there are 'EXHIBITS (FILED SEPARATELY).' However, no exhibits were filed until three days before this hearing. Although Defendant is seeking to compel Leisah Hall to deposition, there is no evidence Leisah Hall was served with a deposition subpoena.

Finally, although Defendant's papers identify attorney Neil Scheaffer as the 'Receiver,' Defendant is aware the appointed receiver in this action is Richardson Griswold, not Mr. Scheaffer. Mr. Scheaffer is Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

2979833  5 CASE NUMBER: CASE TITLE:  THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA VS GOLDEN [IMAGED]  37-2021-00021672-CU-MC-CTL the receiver's attorney. This court granted a protective order more than a year ago preventing Defendant from taking Mr. Scheaffer's deposition.

Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

2979833  5