ABIMBOLA AJAYI VS. CITY & COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, ET AL

SF Superior Court - Law & Motion / Discovery Dept 302 - CGC25621290 - August 11, 2026 Hearing date: August 11, 2026 Case number: CGC25621290 Case title: ABIMBOLA AJAYI VS. CITY & COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, ET AL Case Number: | | CGC25621290 | Case Title: | | ABIMBOLA AJAYI VS. CITY & COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, ET AL | Court Date: | | 2026-08-11 09:00 AM | Calendar Matter: | | Amended Consolidated Notice Of Motion And Motion For Protective Ordder To Limit Defendants' Expert Testimony (Evid. Code 720); And For Monetary And Evidentiary Sanctions For Bad Faith Litigation Tacts Of Discovery Misuse Of The Discovery Process (C.C.P. 2023.010, 2012.030) | Rulings: | | Matter on calendar for Tuesday, August 11, 2026, Line 4, PLAINTIFF ABIMBOLA AJAYI's Amended Consolidated Motion For Protective Order To Limit Defendants' Expert Testimony (Evid.

Code 720); And For Monetary And Evidentiary Sanctions For Bad Faith Litigation Tacts Of Discovery Misuse Of The Discovery Process (C.C.P. 2023.010, 2012.030).

Plaintiff Abimbola Ajayi's motion for protective order to limit defendants' expert testimony is denied as premature. With the trial continued to May 17, 2027 and all pre-trial deadlines triggered off of the new trial date, expert disclosures, including any revised disclosure concerning Dr. Frank Farrell, and expert depositions will not occur for many months.

The concern that prompted this motion -- that an expert should not be designated or encouraged to testify about matters beyond her expertise -- is valid. However, the determination of whether a particular expert proposes to testify beyond her expertise almost always depends on the matters for which the expert is designated and the opinions expressed at a deposition.

The April 23 email was a privileged communication that was inadvertently sent to plaintiff and is not covered by the narrow crime-fraud exception and henceforth must not be referred to by plaintiff in any filings or communications.

This motion was motivated by a good faith concern that defendants are or might be intending to elicit opinions from their experts beyond the experts' expertise and thus, while unsuccessful, the motion does not lack substantial justification, so defendants' requests for monetary sanctions are denied.

For the 9:00 a.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/HEK). | |