Motion to Compel Form Interrogatory Responses, Set One
24CV010619: DAY, et al. vs GOLDEN POND, L.P., et al. 07/27/2026 Hearing on Motion to Compel Form Interrogatory Responses, Set One in Department 8C
Tentative Ruling
NOTICE:
Consistent with Local Rule 1.06(B), any party requesting oral argument on any matter on this calendar must comply with the following procedure:
To request limited oral argument, on any matter on this calendar, you must call the Department 8C Oral Argument Request Line at (916) 874-8380 by 4:00 p.m. the Court day before the hearing and advise opposing counsel. 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.
Unless ordered to appear in person by the Court, parties may appear remotely either telephonically or by video conference via the Zoom video/audio conference platform with notice to the Court and all other parties in accordance with Code of Civil Procedure §367.75. Although remote participation is not required, the Court will presume all parties are appearing remotely for non-evidentiary civil hearings.
Any hearing on this matter will be held by the Hon. Thadd A. Blizzard in Department 11B of the Tani G. Cantil-Sakauye Courthouse located at 500 G Street Sacramento, CA. The Zoom Link for Department 11B is https://saccourt-ca-gov.zoomgov.com/j/16090961628 and the Zoom Meeting ID is 160 9096 1628. To appear on Zoom telephonically, call (833) 568-8864 and enter the Zoom Meeting ID referenced above. NO COURTCALL APPEARANCES WILL BE ACCEPTED.
Although any hearing on this matter will be held in Department 11B, you must call the Department 8C Oral Argument Request Line provided above to request argument.
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
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?”
24CV010619: DAY, et al. vs GOLDEN POND, L.P., et al. 07/27/2026 Hearing on Motion to Compel Form Interrogatory Responses, Set One in Department 8C
https://saccourt.ca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/227/639084034465370000.
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 forward the form to the Court Reporters Office and an official reporter will be provided.
TENTATIVE RULING
***NOTICE: THIS MATTER WILL BE HEARD IN DEPARTMENT 11B OF THE TANI G. CANTIL-SAKAUYE COURTHOUSE LOCATED AT 500 G STREET SACRAMENTO, CA. PARTIES APPEARING REMOTELY VIA ZOOM SHOULD ENSURE THAT THEY ARE USING THE CORRECT ZOOM LINK AND/OR ZOOM MEETING ID FOR DEPARTMENT 11B, WHICH ARE PROVIDED ABOVE.***
Plaintiff Brandon Days (Plaintiff) motion to compel Defendants Golden Pond, L.P. (Golden Pond) and D.M.G. Properties, Inc. (D.M.G. Properties) (collectively, Defendants) to serve responses to Plaintiffs Form Interrogatories, Set One is UNOPPOSED and ruled upon as follows.
Plaintiff is admonished for failing to comply with California Rules of Court rule 3.1110(f)(4), which requires electronic exhibits to include electronic bookmarks linking to the first page of each exhibit. Failure to comply with these requirements in the future may result in papers not being considered, matters being continued so that papers may be submitted in the proper format, and/or the imposition of sanctions.
Plaintiff served the subject discovery requests on April 7, 2026. (Miller Decl., ¶ 3, Exh. A.) Defendants have not served responses. (Miller Decl., ¶ 6.) Thus, Plaintiff is entitled to an order compelling Defendants responses. (Code Civ. Proc. § 2030.290(b).)
However, Plaintiffs motion fails to comply with Local Rule 2.31(E), which states:
Parties shall make separate reservations, pursuant to Rule 2.39 for each remedy before
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO
24CV010619: DAY, et al. vs GOLDEN POND, L.P., et al. 07/27/2026 Hearing on Motion to Compel Form Interrogatory Responses, Set One in Department 8C
filing multiple discovery-related motions in the same case with the same hearing date. When simultaneously filing multiple discovery-related motions in the same case with the same hearing date, each motion shall be filed as a separate document and a separate filing fee paid for each. Parties may not combine motions pertaining to different types of discovery within the same document. Failure to comply with any part of this rule regarding discovery motions may, in the discretion of the Court, be grounds for the motions being dropped without consideration.[1]
(Local Rule 2.31(E).)
Here, Plaintiff seeks to compel two different defendants to serve responses to two separate sets of discovery requests, and thus seeks multiple remedies. Thus, under Local Rule 2.31(E), Plaintiff was required to file two separate motions with two separate filing fees.
Since the motion is unopposed, and since trial is currently scheduled for October 19, 2026, the Court, in its discretion, declines to drop the motion without consideration. Therefore, the motion to compel is GRANTED on the condition that Plaintiff submit a second $60.00 filing fee at or before the hearing. If a second filing fee is not paid, the motion will be dropped in its entirety.
If the second filing fee is paid, then Defendants shall serve verified responses, without objections, to Plaintiffs Form Interrogatories, Set One, by no later than August 10, 2026, or a later date agreed to by the parties in writing.
This minute order is effective immediately. No formal order or other notice is required. (Code Civ. Proc. § 1019.5; Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1312.)
[1] This iteration of the rule became effective July 1, 2026, which is after Plaintiff filed this motion. However, the
rule was originally implemented on July 1, 2024, and the prior version of the rule was substantially similar to the current version in requiring discovery motions to be filed as separate documents with separate filing fees paid when multiple remedies were sought.