Plaintiff's Motion for Relief from Waiver of Objections to Requests for Admission
Stanislaus County - Civil - https://www.stanislaus.courts.ca.gov/online-services/tentative-rulings/civil-tentati ve-rulings Civil Tentative Rulings June 16, 2026
The following is the tentative ruling for a case calendared before Judge John R. Mayne in Department 21:
CV-24-008540 - TESORO HOMES INC vs BELSERA HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION - Plaintiff's Motion for Relief from Waiver of Objections to Requests for Admission - GRANTED.
Plaintiff submitted the instant motion on April 20, 2026. Defendant submitted an opposition on June 3, 2026. Plaintiff submitted a reply on June 9, 2026. Defendant submitted an unauthorized sur-reply on June 11, 2026.
"If a party to whom requests for admission are directed fails to serve a timely response, the following rules apply: (a) The party to whom the requests for admission are directed waives any objection to the requests, including one based on privilege or on the protection for work product under Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 2018.010)." (Code Civ. Proc., Sec. 2033.280.)
"The court, on motion, may relieve that party from this waiver on its determination that both of the following conditions are satisfied: (1) The party has subsequently served a response that is in substantial compliance with Sections 2033.210, 2033.220, and 2033.230. (2) The party's failure to serve a timely response was the result of mistake, inadvertence, or excusable neglect." (Ibid.)
Plaintiff Tesoro Homes, Inc. ("Tesoro") seeks relief from inadvertent wavier of objections to Defendant's request for admissions under Code of Civil Procedure section 2033.280. Plaintiff served late responses due to a calendaring error. Defendant does not appear to oppose the requested relief but instead argues that any relief should not be construed as a determination that Plaintiff's responses are complete, code-compliant, or otherwise sufficient.
Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 2033.280, the Court GRANTS the motion for relief from waiver of objections. The Court makes no determination on whether the responses are otherwise sufficient.
The following are the tentative rulings for cases calendared before Judge Stacy P. Speiller in Department 22:
CV-24-006546 - JACKSON, THUY vs SN SERVICING CORPORATION - Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment - CONTINUED to July 23, 2026 at 8:30 am in Department 22.
Plaintiff's opposition was submitted four court days before the hearing and thus, is untimely. (Code Civ. Proc. Sec. 437c.) Plaintiff's belated submission deprived Defendant of its full statutory opportunity to submit a reply brief. Despite Plaintiff's late submission, Defendant submitted a short reply on June 11, 2026.
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”
The Court will continue the hearing. Defendant is authorized to file an additional reply brief in accordance with the statutory deadlines. Accordingly, the hearing is CONTINUED to July 23, 2026 at 8:30 am in Department 22.
PR-25-000083 - IN THE MATTER OF DONALD LARRY LILLEGARD AND DENISE LOUISE LILLEGARD 2002 TRUST - Trustee/Objector's Motion to Quash Deposition Subpoena for Business Records or, in the Alternative, for a Protective Order; and for Sanctions Against Petitioner, Brett Lillegard - - GRANTED.
There being no active controversy in this case at this time, it appears to the Court that the subpoena is MOOT. The motion to quash the subpoena is therefore GRANTED. Monetary sanctions for a motion to quash a subpoena are discretionary (see Code Civ. Proc., Sec. 1987.2(a)), and the Court declines to award them here. The Court notes that the Moving Party should have filed a separate statement as required by rule 3.1345(a)(5) of the California Rules of Court.
The following are the tentative rulings for cases calendared before Judge Clifford Tong in Department 23:
CV-20-004893 - ONEMAIN FINANCIAL GROUP LLC vs GUNNEAR, PETER E - Defendant's Motion for Order Setting Aside and Vacating its Prior Order of Dismissal and for Entry of Judgment Pursuant to Stipulation of the Parties - HEARING REQUIRED.