DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
34-2022-00316048-CU-OR-GDS·sacramento·Civil·Discovery - Motion to Compel
Hearing about 3 years agoGRANTED

E & A Monroy Holdings LLC vs. HSU Family Trust

Motion to Compel Production; Motion for monetary sanctions

Hearing date
Jun 28, 2023
Department
54
Judge
Prevailing
Moving Party
Appearance
Not required

Motion type

Browse all Motion to Compel Further Responses rulings statewide →

Monetary amounts referenced

$760$1,565

Parties

PlaintiffE & A Monroy Holdings LLC
DefendantHSU Family Trust
DefendantSummer Palace, LLC
DefendantJien Hsu

Ruling

34-2022-00316048-CU-OR-GDS: E & A Monroy Holdings LLC vs. HSU Family Trust 06/28/2023 Motion to Compel - Other - Civil Law and Motion MTC Production (Summer Palace) in Department 54

Tentative Ruling

Plaintiff E&A Monroy Holdings, LLCs’ (“Plaintiff”) motion to compel defendant Summer Palace, LLC (“Defendant”) to produce documents as ordered by this Court on February 14, 2023, and for monetary sanctions is UNOPPOSED and GRANTED as follows.

On February 14, 2023, this Court granted Plaintiff’s motion to compel Defendant to produce responsive documents as indicated in Defendant’s responses to Plaintiff’s Request for Production of Document, Set One. The Court also granted Plaintiff’s request for monetary sanctions against Defendant in the amount of $760.

Plaintiff contends that Defendant has not produced any documents and has not paid the awarded sanctions and, therefore, has not complied with the Court’s Order. Plaintiff seeks an order once again compelling Defendant to produce responsive documents and seeks monetary sanctions against Defendant due to misuse of the discovery process.

Plaintiff’s motion to compel Defendant to comply with the Court’s February 14, 2023, Order is GRANTED. Defendant is once again ordered to produce responsive documents as indicated in its responses to Plaintiff's Request for Production of Documents, Set One, on or before July 12, 2023.

Although Plaintiff requested issue sanctions in its concurrent motion directed at defendant Jien Hsu, as Trustee of the Hsu Family Trust, no issue sanctions are requested against this Defendant on this motion as issue sanctions are not requested or discussed in the notice of motion or memorandum of points and authorities. Although the conclusion of Plaintiff’s memorandum of points and authorities requests issue sanctions, this appears to be a clerical error.

Plaintiff’s request for monetary sanctions against Defendant and its counsel in the amount of $1,565 is excessive, especially because it includes anticipated time to prepare a reply to this unopposed motion. However, the Court awards monetary sanctions in the amount of $760 (representing two hours of attorney time at the reasonable rate of $350 per hour, plus the $60 filing fee) pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 2023.020 and 2023.030 for failure to meet and confer. The record establishes Plaintiff made multiple good faith attempts to meet and confer with defense counsel on at least four separate occasions prior to the filing of this motion and defense counsel never responded.

The Court must therefore conclude that defense counsel intentionally failed to meet and confer. Sanctions to be paid no later than July 28, 2023, and, if not paid by that date, Plaintiff may prepare for the Court's signature a formal order granting the sanctions, which may then be enforced as a separate judgment. (Newland v. Superior Court (1995) 40 Cal.App.4th 608, 615.)

The minute order is effective immediately. No formal order pursuant to CRC Rule 3.1312 or

34-2022-00316048-CU-OR-GDS: E & A Monroy Holdings LLC vs. HSU Family Trust 06/28/2023 Motion to Compel - Other - Civil Law and Motion MTC Production (Summer Palace) in Department 54

further notice is required.

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 Law and Motion Oral Argument Request Line at (916) 874-2615 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. The Department 53/54 Zoom Link is https://saccourt-cagov.zoomgov.com/my/sscdept53.54 and the Zoom Meeting ID is 161 4650 6749. To appear on Zoom telephonically, call (833) 568-8864 and enter the Zoom Meeting ID referenced above. NO COURTCALL APPEARANCES WILL BE ACCEPTED.

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 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 Court’s 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

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO

34-2022-00316048-CU-OR-GDS: E & A Monroy Holdings LLC vs. HSU Family Trust 06/28/2023 Motion to Compel - Other - Civil Law and Motion MTC Production (Summer Palace) in Department 54

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 Reporter’s Office and an official reporter will be provided.

Cited authorities

Extracting citations from the ruling text…
Verify against the source PDF — LLM extraction may miss or mis-normalize citations.

Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities

Ask about this ruling

Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”

Answers reference only this ruling's text. Not legal advice — always verify against the source PDF.

Find similar rulings

Source

Share