Motion to Compel further responses to special interrogatories
25CV009026: WALKER, et al. vs COMMONSPIRIT HEALTH, A NONPROFIT CORPORATION, et al. 05/08/2026 Hearing on Motion to Compel further responses to special interrogatories against Mortuary Support Services in Department 8A
Tentative Ruling
NO APPEARANCE REQUIRED
Plaintiff Emilliano Walkers (Plaintiff) motion to compel Defendant Mortuary Support Services of Northern California, LLC (MSSNC) to serve initial responses to Special Interrogatories, Set One, and request for sanctions is ruled upon as follows.
There is a trial date presently set in this matter for March 29, 2027.
By way of this motion, Plaintiff seeks to compel MSSNCs initial responses to his propounded Special Interrogatories, Set One. (Ntc. Mot.) Plaintiff also seeks monetary sanctions in the amount of $5,735, against MSSNC and its counsel. (Ibid.)
On July 22, 2025, Plaintiff served four sets of written discovery on MSSNC, including Special Interrogatories, Set One, which consisted of 48 Special Interrogatories. (Heller Decl., ¶ 2, Exh. 2.) Plaintiff represents that on September 29, 2025, MSSNC served its responses to RFPD 1, RFA 1 and FROG 1, however, MSSNC did not serve any initial responses to Special Interrogatories, Set One. (Id. at ¶ 6.) At the time of filing this motion, MSSNC still has not provided any initial responses to Plaintiffs Special Interrogatories, Set One. (Id. at ¶ 12.)
While MSSNC has filed an opposition to this motion, MSSNC does not appear to substantively dispute the merits. Rather, MSSNC appears to solely take issue with Plaintiffs purported failure to meet and confer prior to bringing this motion. (See Oppn, p. 4:11-17.) The Court would not find this to be grounds to deny the motion. This matter is substantively unopposed, which the Court construes as a concession on the merits. (See D.I. Chadbourne, Inc. v. Superior Court (1964) 60 Cal.2d 723, 728, fn.4.)
Accordingly, Plaintiffs motion to compel the initial responses of MSSNC to his propounded Special Interrogatories, Set One is GRANTED. MSSNC shall serve verified responses, without objections, to the subject discovery no later than May 29, 2026, unless the Parties agree in writing to extend the response deadline.
The request for sanctions is DENIED as the motion was substantively unopposed. Although
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?”
25CV009026: WALKER, et al. vs COMMONSPIRIT HEALTH, A NONPROFIT CORPORATION, et al. 05/08/2026 Hearing on Motion to Compel further responses to special interrogatories against Mortuary Support Services in Department 8A
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. Firmaterr, Inc. (1997) 60 Cal.App.4th 352, 355.) However, the Court cautions that 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 Ins. Exchange (1991) 231 Cal.App.3d 481.)
To request oral argument on this matter, you must call Department 8a at 916-874-5754 by 4:00 p.m., the court day before this hearing and notification of oral argument must be made to the opposing party/counsel. If no call is made, the tentative ruling becomes the order of the court. (Local Rule 1.06.)
Please check your tentative ruling prior to the next Court date at www.saccourt.ca.gov prior to the above referenced hearing date.
If oral argument is requested, the parties may and are encouraged to appear by Zoom with the links below:
To join by Zoom Link - https://saccourt-ca-gov.zoomgov.com/j/16108301121 To join by phone dial (833) 568-8864, ID 16108301121
Parties requesting services of a court reporter will need to arrange for private court reporter services at their own expense, pursuant to Government code section 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-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
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO
25CV009026: WALKER, et al. vs COMMONSPIRIT HEALTH, A NONPROFIT CORPORATION, et al. 05/08/2026 Hearing on Motion to Compel further responses to special interrogatories against Mortuary Support Services in Department 8A
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.
This minute order is effective immediately. Pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 3.1312(a), no further written order or further notice is necessary.