Judge: Ronald F. Frazier, Case: 37-2022-00018615-CU-BC-CTL, Date: 2023-10-13 Tentative Ruling

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,

DEPT.:

EVENT DATE:

EVENT TIME:

HALL OF JUSTICE

TENTATIVE RULINGS - October 12, 2023

10/13/2023  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  Breach of Contract/Warranty Discovery Hearing 37-2022-00018615-CU-BC-CTL BALVERDE URIARTE VS CUMMING CHEVROLET [IMAGED] CAUSAL DOCUMENT/DATE FILED: Motion to Compel Discovery, 02/24/2023

Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Further Discovery Responses [to Requests for Production] from Defendant is GRANTED. (ROA 36.) Defendant's opposition papers refer to a supporting declaration by Attorney Arash Yaraghchian.

However, no declaration was filed.

As to Request Nos. 16-33 and 45-46, the motion is granted. Defendant asserts it has already produced documents in response to Plaintiff's requests. On reply, Plaintiff admits receipt of a document production from Defendant, but is unable to determine which documents are responsive to which requests because Defendant's initial responses state no documents will be produced, and Defendant failed to serve verified further responses after producing documents. The Code requires a responding party to identify the documents responsive to each request in its responses. (Code Civ. Proc. § 2031.280(a).) Defendant has not complied with this Code requirement. As such, it is unclear whether Defendant has made a complete, partial, or no production in response to any given request.

As to Request Nos. 37-41, the motion is granted. Plaintiff seeks documents pertaining to Defendant's internal complaint and repair codes. Defendant's assertions that the requested documents are not relevant and/or are subject to trade secret privilege are not persuasive. Defendant has not met its initial burden to demonstrate the requested documents are trade secret privileged. Moreover, Defendant's concerns are mitigated by the fact that the parties have stipulated to a protective order in this case.

In light of the upcoming trial date, Defendant is ordered to serve verified further responses and all responsive documents to the requests on or before October 20, 2023.

Plaintiff's request for monetary sanctions is granted. Defendant is ordered to pay the monetary sanction of $2,125.00 to Plaintiff on or before November 10, 2023.

Plaintiff's motion exceeded the page limit. (Cal. R. Court, rule 3.3113(d).) Plaintiff's counsel is to comply with all court rules going forward. The court has discretion to refuse to consider memoranda that exceed the page limit. (Cal. R. Court, rules 3.1113(g); 3.1300(d).) Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

2942816  3