Judge: Teresa A. Beaudet, Case: 21STCV16131, Date: 2022-10-24 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV16131    Hearing Date: October 24, 2022    Dept: 50

 

 

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

Department 50

 

ROSARIO GARCIA,

 

                        Plaintiff,

            vs.

 

MANUBHAI PATEL, et al.,  

 

                        Defendants.

Case No.:

21STCV16131

Hearing Date:

October 24, 2022

Hearing Time:

10:00 a.m.

ORDER RE:

 

PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR ORDERS:

 

(1)   COMPELLING RESPONSES TO PLAINTIFF’S FIRST SET OF FORM INTERROGATORIES- GENERAL TO DEFENDANT SHREE HARI OM, INC.;

 

(2)   COMPELLING RESPONSES TO PLAINTIFF’S FIRST SET OF FORM INTERROGATORIES- EMPLOYMENT TO DEFENDANT SHREE HARI OM, INC.;

 

(3)   COMPELLING RESPONSES TO PLAINTIFF’S SECOND SET OF FORM INTERROGATORIES- EMPLOYMENT TO DEFENDANT SHREE HARI OM, INC.;

 

(4)   COMPELLING RESPONSES TO PLAINTIFF’S FIRST SET OF REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS TO DEFENDANT SHREE HARI OM, INC.;

 

(5)   COMPELLING RESPONSES TO PLAINTIFF’S FIRST SET OF REQUESTS FOR ADMISSIONS TO DEFENDANT SHREE HARI OM, INC.;

 

(6)   COMPELLING RESPONSES TO PLAINTIFF’S SECOND SET OF REQUESTS FOR ADMISSIONS TO DEFENDANT SHREE HARI OM, INC.;

 

(7)   ESTABLISHING ADMISSIONS TO PLAINTIFF’S FIRST SET OF REQUESTS FOR ADMISSIONS TO DEFENDANT SHREE HARI OM, INC.;

 

(8)   ESTABLISHING ADMISSIONS TO PLAINTIFF’S SECOND REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS TO DEFENDANT SHREE HARI OM, INC.;

 

(9)   AWARDING SANCTIONS OF $2,672.50 AGAINST DEFENDANT SHREE HARI OM, INC., AND ITS ATTORNEY OF RECORD, FRANK A. WEISER

 

PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR ORDERS:

 

(1)   COMPELLING RESPONSES TO PLAINTIFF’S FIRST SET OF FORM INTERROGATORIES- GENERAL TO DEFENDANT MANUBHAI PATEL;

 

(2)   COMPELLING RESPONSES TO PLAINTIFF’S SECOND SET OF FORM INTERROGATORIES- GENERAL TO DEFENDANT MANUBHAI PATEL;

 

(3)   COMPELLING RESPONSES TO PLAINTIFF’S FIRST SET OF REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS TO DEFENDANT MANUBHAI PATEL;

 

(4)   COMPELLING RESPONSES TO PLAINTIFF’S FIRST SET OF REQUESTS FOR ADMISSIONS TO DEFENDANT;

(5)   ESTABLISHING ADMISSIONS TO PLAINTIFF’S FIRST SET OF REQUESTS FOR ADMISSIONS TO DEFENDANT MANUBHAI PATEL;

 

(6)   AWARDING SANCTIONS OF $2,672.50 AGAINST DEFENDANT MANUBHAI PATEL AND ITS ATTORNEY OF RECORD, FRANK A. WEISER;

 

 

 

The above-referenced motions by Plaintiff Rosario Garcia (“Plaintiff”) will be continued to a new date as set forth below. NO HEARING WILL TAKE PLACE ON OCTOBER 24, 2022.

Code of Civil Procedure section 2016.080 provides at subdivision (a): “If an informal resolution is not reached by the parties, as described in Section 2016.040, the court may conduct an informal discovery conference upon request by a party or on the court’s own motion for the purpose of discussing discovery matters in dispute between the parties.” Pursuant to that Section, and the Court’s power to “amend and control its process and orders so as to make them conform to law and justice” pursuant to CCP § 128(a)(8), the Court orders the parties in this case to participate in an Informal Discovery Conference (“IDC”).

Lead or other designated counsel for the parties with full authority are ordered to participate in person in an IDC pursuant to the Court’s power under Code of Civil Procedure section 128(a)(8) and Code of Civil Procedure section 2016.040. After consulting with opposing counsel regarding available dates, Plaintiff must make a prompt reservation for the IDC using the Court’s online reservation system. Plaintiff must file Dept. 50’s one-page IDC form in the department seven days prior to the IDC, and the responding parties may file the same form in the department setting forth a response three days prior to the IDC.

Once Plaintiff has confirmed an IDC date, Plaintiff must use the Court’s online reservation system to continue the motions to a post-IDC discovery hearing date. The parties are ordered to have with them whatever materials are needed to make the IDC session productive and successful.

Prior to the IDC date, lead or other designated counsel for the parties, with full authority, are to meet and confer, in person or via telephone in a further attempt to resolve as many of the issues as possible before the IDC. (See CRC Rule 3.670(f)(2).) If the parties resolve their discovery disputes before the IDC date, Plaintiff is ordered to take both the IDC and the motions off calendar as soon as possible.

Plaintiff is ordered to provide notice of this Order.

 

DATED:  October 24, 2022                          

________________________________

Hon. Teresa A. Beaudet

Judge, Los Angeles Superior Court