MEGAN DILLEY, AS AN INDIVIDUAL, AND AS SUCCESSOR VS. PG&E CORPORATION, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION ET AL

Set for Law and Motion/Discovery Calendar on Wednesday, April 01, 2026, Line 2. Megan Dilley's Motion for Reconsideration of Order Appointing Discovery Referee is DENIED. (This matter is going to be heard at 1:30P.M by Judge Cindee Mayfield.)

Code of Civil Procedure section 1008 provides that "any party affected by [an] order may, within 10 days after service upon the party of written notice of entry of the order and based upon new or different facts, circumstances, or law, make application to the same judge or court that made the order, to reconsider the matter and modify, amend, or revoke the prior order." (Code Civ. Proc., 1008, subd. (a).)

In her reply, Plaintiff contends that reconsideration of the discovery referee appointment is warranted in light of the closure of fact discovery, which necessarily implicates the Court's December 26, 2025 order. That argument is untimely. The statutory deadline to seek reconsideration of that order has long since passed.

Even setting timeliness aside, Plaintiff fails to identify any new or different facts, circumstances, or law justifying reconsideration. Plaintiff points to the appointed referee's unavailability, but does not address the Court's underlying rationale for requiring a discovery referee. As the Court previously observed, the volume and complexity of discovery in this case necessitate a neutral to facilitate resolution of disputes. While fact discovery has closed, disputes concerning expert discovery remain and are properly within the scope of a discovery referee's role. Plaintiff therefore has not demonstrated diligence or any material change in circumstances of warranting reconsideration. At most, the appropriate remedy is to replace the unavailable referee

IT IS ORDERED: The Honorable Judge Gary Nadler is appointed as the Discovery Referee pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure 639. All other terms of the order filed December 26, 2025, remain in full force. Each party is directed to contact the discovery referee, c/o JAMS, Two Embarcadero Center, Suite 1500, San Francisco, CA 94111, (415) 774-2626, no later than five (5) court days after service of this order to make arrangement for payment of required fees.

For the 1:30 p.m. calendar, all attorneys and parties may appear in Department 302 remotely or in person. Remote hearings will be conducted by videoconference using Zoom. (Dept. 302 Zoom ID 160 409 7690; Passcode 516287.) 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 contestdept302tr@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 contestdept302tr@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 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. =(302/CM) | |