| Case | County / Judge | Motion | Ruling | Indexed | Hearing |
|---|
Motion to Compel Further Responses to Request for Production of Documents; Request for Monetary Sanctions
Matter on the Law & Motion / Discovery calendar for Tuesday, October 7, 2025, Line 1. [Part 2 of 2 of the tentative ruling.]
PLAINTIFFS BEATRICE CEJA, ALEXIS PELAYO, ARMANI PELAYO, ESMERELDA PELAYO, AND EMMANUEL CEJA'S MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSES TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS, SET TWO, AGAINST DEFENDANT MOBILE PRODUCTS, INC., REQUEST FOR MONETARY SANCTIONS.
The court denies further relief as to 33 (All DOCUMENTS relating to the design, manufacture, and engineering of the LayMor Sweepmaster (SM) 300 brake system); 34 (All DOCUMENTS relating to the design, manufacture, and engineering of the LayMor Sweepmaster (SM) 300 brake pedal); 43 (All DOCUMENTS which relate to or reflect the cost to install the brake pedal for the LayMor Sweepmaster (SM) 300). These are unduly broad absent some further factual showing that the subsequent design's brake system is a feasible alternative design for the prior model's brake system.
The court narrows the following requests: 42 is narrowed to include only "tests, studies, evaluations, and analyses that evaluate the safety and effectiveness of the LayMor Sweepmaster (SM) 300's braking systems" and not all documents concerning same. Mobile Products shall amend within two weeks of entry of this order and shall produce responsive documents within 30 days of entry of this order.
Both parties seek sanctions. "[T]he court shall impose a monetary sanction . . . against any party, person, or attorney who unsuccessfully makes or opposes a motion to compel further response to a demand, unless it finds that the one subject to the sanction acted with substantial justification or that other circumstances make the imposition of the sanction unjust." (Code Civ. Proc., section 2031.310, subd. (h).) The court finds that Mobile Products' opposition lacked substantial justification and it orders Mobile Products to pay $4,875 to Ceja within 30 days of entry of this order.
For the 9:00 a.m. calendar, all attorneys and parties may appear in Department 301 remotely or in person. Remote hearings will be conducted by videoconference using Zoom. (Dept. 301 Zoom ID 161 502 4290; Passcode 700956.) 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 contestdept301tr@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.
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?”
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 contestdept301tr@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 or Discovery 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. [End of part 2 of 2 of the tentative ruling.] =(301/CVA) | |