Hardcaste – Trust

billing statements regarding money paid from the trust or concerning trust litigation from Brower Law Group, Greenberg Gross, and Holly Emge, Esq. to be given to Jeffrey Horwich.” (ROA 2303, emphasis added.) The parties should be prepared to address whether that order addresses, in any fashion, the instant motion to quash.

2 Rayhan – Other Probate; Continued to 09/09/2026 at 09:00 30-2024-01401950 AM in Department CM08.

3 Turner – Trust; 30-2025-01532996

4 Katz - Probate; 30-2022-01251727

5 Finnegan – Conservatorship; 30-2019-01047364

6 Rash – Guardianship; 30-2019-01057498 Notice of Withdrawal filed 08/11/2026 (ROA 199).

7 Hardcaste – Trust; Motions to Compel (3) and Motion to Deem 30-2024-01405208 Admitted

I. Petitioner Jan Reagan’s Motion to Compel Responses to Form Interrogatories Propounded on Respondent Gregory Arthur (ROA 90)

Code of Civil Procedure § 2030.290 states, in part, “If a party to whom interrogatories are directed fails to serve a timely response, the following rules apply: . . . [¶] (b) The party propounding the interrogatories may move for an order compelling response to the interrogatories.”

On February 23, 2026, Petitioner served form interrogatories on Respondent. Responses were due March 30, 2026. Respondent did not provide

timely written responses or request additional time in which to respond. This motion, filed May 13, 2026, followed.

On June 16, 2026, Respondent served written responses to the form interrogatories. Accordingly, the motion is DENIED as moot. However, Petitioner’s accompanying request for sanctions is GRANTED in the amount of $1,350 (3 attorney hours at $450 per hour). Sanctions are to be paid within 30 days of this order.

II. Petitioner Jan Reagan’s Motion to Compel Responses to Special Interrogatories Propounded on Respondent Gregory Arthur (ROA 93)

Code of Civil Procedure § 2030.290 states, in part, “If a party to whom interrogatories are directed fails to serve a timely response, the following rules apply: . . . [¶] (b) The party propounding the interrogatories may move for an order compelling response to the interrogatories.”

On February 23, 2026, Petitioner served special interrogatories on Respondent. Responses were due March 30, 2026. Respondent did not provide timely written responses or request additional time in which to respond. This motion, filed May 13, 2026, followed.

On June 16, 2026, Respondent served written responses to the special interrogatories. Accordingly, the motion is DENIED as moot. However, Petitioner’s accompanying request for sanctions is GRANTED in the amount of $1,350 (3 attorney hours at $450 per hour). Sanctions are to be paid within 30 days of this order.

III. Petitioner Jan Reagan’s Motion to Compel Responses to Requests for Production Propounded on Respondent Gregory Arthur (ROA 92)

Code of Civil Procedure § 2031.300 states, in part: “If a party to whom a demand for inspection, copying, testing, or sampling is directed fails to serve a timely response to it, the following rules shall apply: . . . [¶] (b) The party making the demand may move for an order compelling response to the demand.”

On February 23, 2026, Petitioner served requests for production on Respondent. Responses were due March 30, 2026. Respondent did not provide timely written responses or request additional time in which to respond. This motion, filed May 13, 2026, followed.

On June 16, 2026, Respondent served written responses to the requests for production. Accordingly, the motion is DENIED as moot. However, Petitioner’s accompanying request for sanctions is GRANTED in the amount of $1,350 (3 attorney hours at $450 per hour). Sanctions are to be paid within 30 days of this order.

IV. Petitioner’s Motion to Deem Admitted All Requests for Admission Propounded on Respondent Gregory Arthur (ROA 85)

Code of Civil Procedure § 2033.250, provides, in part, “Within 30 days after service of the requests for admission, the party to whom the requests are directed shall serve the original of the response to them on the requesting party, and a copy of the response on all other parties who have appeared. . . .” Code of Civil Procedure § 2033.280, states, in relevant part, “If a party to whom requests for admission are directed fails to serve a timely response, the following rules apply: . . . [¶] (b) The requesting party may move for an order that the genuineness of any documents and the truth of any matters specified in the request be deemed admitted, as well as for a monetary sanction under Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 2023.010.)”

On February 23, 2026, Petitioner served requests for admission on Respondent. Responses were due on March 20, 2026. Respondent did not timely serve responses and did not request an extension of time in which to respond. This motion, filed on May 13, 2026, followed.

On June 16, 2026, a month after the motion was filed, Respondent served written responses, which appear to be substantially compliant with the statutory requirements. Accordingly, the motion is DENIED as moot. However, Petitioner’s accompanying request for sanctions is GRANTED in the amount of $1,350 (3 attorney hours at $450 per hour). (Code of Civ. Proc., § 2033.280(c). Sanctions are to be paid within 30 days of this order.