Motion to Compel Discovery
24CV019993: MCKAGUE LAW GROUP, PC vs SHIRLEY 07/16/2025 Hearing on Motion to Compel Discovery (not "Further Discovery") Form in Department 53
Tentative Ruling
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that pursuant to Public Notice Civil Division Wednesday Law and Motion Calendar any oral arguments regarding this tentative ruling will be heard in Department 25, located at 720 9th Street, Sacramento, CA, the Hon. Julie G. Yap presiding. Should argument be requested by either party, the requesting party must call the Law and Motion Oral Argument Request Line at (916) 874-2615, by 4:00 p.m. the Court day before the hearing, request the hearing, and notify the opposing party of the location and time of hearing pursuant to Local Rule 1.06.
At the time of requesting oral argument, the requesting party shall leave a voice mail message: a) identifying themselves as the party requesting oral argument; b) indicating the specific matter/motion for which they are requesting oral argument; and c) confirming that it has notified the opposing party of its intention to appear and that opposing party may appear via Zoom using the Zoom link and Meeting ID indicated below. If no request for oral argument is made, the tentative ruling becomes the final order of the Court.
The Court encourages parties to appear remotely for the hearing on the tentative ruling through the Courts Zoom Application. But, any party wishing to appear in person may do so, provided that party notifies the Court by 4:00 the Court day before the hearing.
The parties may join the Zoom session for hearing on the tentative ruling by audio and/or video through the following link:
https://saccourt-ca-gov.zoomgov.com/my/sscdept25
SIP Address:
16113421868@sip.zoomgov.com
(833) 568-8864
ID: 16113421868
Parties requesting services of a court reporter will need to arrange for private court reporter services at their own expense, pursuant to Government code §68086 and California Rules of Court, Rule 2.956. Requirements for requesting a court reporter are listed in the Policy for Official Reporter Pro Tempore available on the Sacramento Superior Court website at https://www.saccourt.ca.gov/court-reporters/docs/crtrp-6a.pdf. Parties may contact Court- Approved Official Reporters Pro Tempore by utilizing the list of Court Approved Official Reporters Pro Tempore available at https://www.saccourt.ca.gov/court-reporters/docs/crtrp-
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?”
24CV019993: MCKAGUE LAW GROUP, PC vs SHIRLEY 07/16/2025 Hearing on Motion to Compel Discovery (not "Further Discovery") Form in Department 53
13.Pdf
A Stipulation and Appointment of Official Reporter Pro Tempore (CV/E-206) is required to be signed by each party, the private court reporter, and the Judge prior to the hearing, if not using a reporter from the Courts Approved Official Reporter Pro Tempore list.
Once the form is signed it must be filed with the clerk. If a litigant has been granted a fee waiver and requests a court reporter, the party must submit a Request for Court Reporter by a Party with a Fee Waiver (CV/E-211) and it must be filed with the clerk at least 10 days prior to the hearing or at the time the proceeding is scheduled if less than 10 days away. Once approved, the clerk will be forward the form to the Court Reporters Office and an official reporter will be provided.
TENTATIVE RULING
Moving parties are admonished that their notice of motion improperly identifies the Courts location as 313 6th Street. Department 53 is located at 813 6th Street.
Cross-Complainants Lori McCracken, Gary Shirley, and Elaine Shirleys ('Cross-Complainants') motion to compel Cross-Defendant Nathan Cole (Cross-Defendant') to serve verified responses, without objections, to Cross-Complainants Form Interrogatories, Set One is UNOPPOSED and GRANTED.
Cross-Complainants served the at issue discovery requests on January 8, 2025. (Bowen Decl., ¶¶ 9-10.) At the time of the filing of the motion, no responses had been served on Cross- Complainants. (Bowen Decl., ¶ 16.)
Cross-Defendant does not oppose the motion. A party's failure to oppose a motion is construed as a concession on the merits of the motion. (See D.I. Chadbourne, Inc. v. Superior Court (1964) 60 Cal.2d 723, 728, n.4.)
Cross-Defendant shall serve verified responses, without objections, no later than July 29, 2025, unless the parties mutually agree in writing to a later date.
Sanctions are denied because the motion was not opposed. Although CRC 3.1348(a) purports to authorize sanctions if a motion is unopposed, the Court declines to do so, as the specific statutes governing this discovery authorize sanctions only if the motion was unsuccessfully made or opposed. Any order imposing sanctions under the CRC must conform to the conditions of one or more of the statutes authorizing sanctions. (Trans-Action Commercial Investors, Ltd. v.
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO
24CV019993: MCKAGUE LAW GROUP, PC vs SHIRLEY 07/16/2025 Hearing on Motion to Compel Discovery (not "Further Discovery") Form in Department 53
Firmaterr Inc. (1997) 60 Cal.App.4th 352, 355.) However, repeated conduct of failing to comply with discovery obligations may lead the Court to find an abuse of the discovery process and award sanctions on that basis. (Laguna Auto Body v. Farmers Insurance Exchange (1991) 231 Cal.App.3d 481.)
The minute order is effective immediately. No formal order pursuant to CRC Rule 3.1312 or further notice is required.