Notice Of Motion And Motion For Provisional Relief Seeking The Preservation Of Evidence
SF Superior Court - Law & Motion / Discovery Dept 301 - CGC25627029 - June 24, 2026 Hearing date: June 24, 2026 Case number: CGC25627029 Case title: IYO INC., A DELAWARE CORPORATION VS. DAN SARGENT ET AL Case Number: | | CGC25627029 | Case Title: | | IYO INC., A DELAWARE CORPORATION VS. DAN SARGENT ET AL | Court Date: | | 2026-06-24 09:00 AM | Calendar Matter: | | Notice Of Motion And Motion For Provisional Relief Seeking The Preservation Of Evidence; And Memorandum Of Points And Authorities | Rulings: | | On the Law & Motion/Discovery calendar for Wednesday, June 24, 2026, Line 8, PLAINTIFF IYO INC., A DELAWARE CORPORATION'S Motion For Provisional Relief Seeking The Preservation Of Evidence.
Plaintiff Iyo Inc.'s motion for provisional relief seeking the preservation of evidence is denied. Defendant Dan Sargent acknowledges his duty to preserve all relevant evidence. Iyo has presented no evidentiary basis for this court to conclude that there is a risk of destruction of evidence.
The parties dispute whether the court should treat the motion as a request for injunctive relief (which requires a showing of some harm that cannot be remedied by damages at trial (see Tahoe Keys Property Owners' Assn. v. State Water Resources Control Bd. (1994) 23 Cal.App.4th 1459, 1471 ["In general, if the plaintiff may be fully compensated by the payment of damages in the event he prevails, then preliminary injunctive relief should be denied"]), or whether the court can make the order in the exercise of its inherent power to control the proceedings. If the former and the preliminary injunctive relief standard applies, Iyo has not made a sufficient showing of likely harm without an order.
If Sargent fails to preserve evidence, the court will have a range of remedies, including evidentiary or terminating sanctions. (Victor Valley Union High School Dist. v. Superior Court (2023) 91 Cal.App.5th 1121, 1158.) The deterrent effect of such sanctions is generally sufficient to ensure parties comply with their preservation obligations. Iyo argues that the court has the inherent power to issue a preservation order, but the court does not routinely do so in the absence of a showing of a spoliation risk. Iyo has presented no evidence of a spoliation risk.
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 facts that discovery is currently stayed, and that the purpose of this stay is to vindicate the Legislature's intent in permitting litigants subject to SLAPPs to obtain relatively quick dismissal of a SLAPP, also weigh against this court issuing discovery-related orders, even assuming it retains the inherent power to do so.
For the 9:00 a.m. calendar, all attorneys and parties may appear in Department 301 remotely or in person. Remote hearings will be conducted by videoconference using Zoom. (Dept. 301 Zoom ID 161 502 4290; Passcode 700956.) To appear remotely at the hearing, go to the court's website at sfsuperiorcourt.org under "Online Services," navigate to "Tentative Rulings," and click on the appropriate link, or dial the corresponding phone number.
Any party who contests a tentative ruling must send an email to contestdept301tr@sftc.org with a copy to all other parties by 4pm stating, without argument, the portion(s) of the tentative ruling that the party contests. The subject line of the email shall include the line number, case name and case number. The text of the email shall include the name and contact information, including email address, of the attorney or party who will appear at the hearing.
Counsel for the prevailing party is required to prepare a proposed order which repeats verbatim the substantive portion of the tentative ruling and must email it to contestdept301tr@sftc.org prior to the hearing even if the tentative ruling is not contested.
The court no longer provides a court reporter in the Law & Motion or Discovery Department. Parties may retain their own reporter, who may appear in the courtroom or remotely. A retained reporter must be a California certified court reporter (CSR), for only a CSR's transcript may be used in California courts. If a CSR is being retained, include in your email all of the following: their name, CSR and telephone numbers, and their individual work email address. =(301/CVA) |