Judge: Shirley K. Watkins, Case: LC107777, Date: 2022-08-04 Tentative Ruling

If ALL parties submit on the tentative, then no appearance is necessary unless some other matter (i.e., Case Management Conference) is on calendar. It is not necessary to call the court to request oral argument. Oral argument is permitted on all tentative rulings.

Case Number: LC107777    Hearing Date: August 4, 2022    Dept: T

TENTATIVE ORDER

On 4/29/2022, the court ordered that defendants will be allowed to conduct discovery of plaintiff's financial condition except that plaintiff shall not be compelled to produce income tax records based upon Aronow v. Superior Court (2022) 76 Cal.App.5th 865 The Aronow Court opines, “Where a party to a contract with an arbitration provision opposes a motion to compel arbitration on the ground of inability to pay the costs, the moving party can ask leave to conduct limited discovery directed only to the opponent's financial circumstances.” (Aronow v. Superior Court (2022) 76 Cal.App.5th 865, 884.).  Leave was granted.  Defendants served financial discovery.  Plaintiff claims to not have received the discovery but regardless, has stated her opposition to answering any of this discovery. At this point in time, the court should no longer consider this matter. Among other things, plaintiff said in an email that she would file a motion to oppose financial discovery by email on 5/10/2022, then later states that she will not file a motion. She claims privacy rights which include protection of her financial condition.  She sent emails calling them "opposition to financial discovery."  She was emailed with a reminder to respond to the discovery, and she continues to refuse to do so.

Given plaintiff's position that she will not respond to the discovery ordered by the court on 4/29/2022, which is attached to the Declaration of Mr. Jeon filed on 7/26/2022, it appears to be futile to continue this hearing and the order to arbitration stands

.