ESPINO v. HUMASON II, INC., ET AL.
Case Information
Motion(s)
Motion to Compel; Motion to Compel; Motion to Compel
Motion Type Tags
Motion to Compel Discovery
Parties
- Plaintiff: ESPINO
- Defendant: HUMASON II, INC.
Attorneys
- Arakelyan — for Plaintiff
- Catalano — for Defendant
Ruling
LAW AND MOTION CALENDAR APRIL 17, 2026
4. ESPINO v. HUMASON II, INC., ET AL., 25CV1572
(A) Motion to Compel
(B) Motion to Compel
(C) Motion to Compel
On August 28, 2025, Plaintiff served Form Interrogatories, Special Interrogatories,
and Request for Production of Documents. (Arakelyan Decl. ¶ 3.) The parties previously
agreed to several discovery extensions and were engaged in informal settlement
negotiations, which included an agreement to stay discovery. (Catalano Decl. ¶¶ 3-19.) Defendant served verified, code-compliant responses to Plaintiff’s Form
Interrogatories – Employment, Set One, Special Interrogatories, Set One, and Plaintiff’s
Request for Production of Documents, Set One on April 6, 2026. (Catalano Decl. ¶ 22.)
Plaintiff’s Motions do not comply with Local Rule 7.10.05. Repeated failure to
comply with the requirements of the Local Rules may result in sanctions, pursuant to
Local Rule 7.12.13.
The Court finds that Plaintiff’s counsel failed to satisfy the requirements of
§ 2016.040(a) of the Code of Civil Procedure (“CCP”) which requires: “A meet and confer
declaration in support of a motion shall state facts showing a reasonable and good faith
attempt, either in person, by telephone, or by videoconference, to informally resolve
each issue presented by the motion.” Plaintiff sent two e-mails indicating that responses
were due but did not make any further attempts. The Court would generally require the parties to further meet and confer before hearing the Motions, but Defendant has since
served responses, so the Motions are moot.
In terms of sanctions, the Court finds that the imposition of sanctions would be
unjust, as Plaintiff failed to comply with the requirements of CCP § 2016.040.
TENTATIVE RULING # 4: MOTION TO COMPEL FORM INTERROGATORIES, MOTION TO COMPEL PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS, AND MOTION TO COMPEL SPECIAL
LAW AND MOTION CALENDAR APRIL 17, 2026
INTERROGATORIES ARE DENIED AS MOOT. NO HEARING ON THIS MATTER WILL BE
HELD (LEWIS v. SUPERIOR COURT (1999) 19 CAL.4TH 1232, 1247), UNLESS A NOTICE OF
INTENT TO APPEAR AND REQUEST FOR ORAL ARGUMENT IS TRANSMITTED
ELECTRONICALLY THROUGH THE COURT’S WEBSITE OR BY TELEPHONE TO THE COURT
AT (530) 573-3042 BY 4:00 P.M. ON THE DAY THE TENTATIVE RULING IS ISSUED.
NOTICE TO ALL PARTIES OF AN INTENT TO APPEAR MUST BE MADE BY TELEPHONE OR
IN PERSON. PROOF OF SERVICE OF SAID NOTICE MUST BE FILED PRIOR TO OR AT THE
HEARING.