MARY TONNA VS. TIMOTHY JOHN HAWCO ET AL

Matter on the Law & Motion / Discovery calendar for Friday, September 19, 2025, Line 4. [Part 1 of 2 of the tentative ruling.] PLAINTIFF MARY TONNA's Motion For Order Permitting Discovery Of Defendant Timothy John Hawcos Profits And Financial Condition.

Plaintiff Mary Tonna's motion for leave to conduct discovery into defendant Timothy John Hawco's financial condition is denied without prejudice to any subsequent order by the trial court once the case is sent out to trial. Discovery into a defendant's financial condition is subject to Civil Code, section 3295, which prohibits such discovery absent court order. "[B]efore a court may enter an order permitting discovery of a defendant's financial condition, it must (1) weigh the evidence submitted in favor of and in opposition to motion for discovery, and (2) make a finding that it is very likely the plaintiff will prevail on his claim for punitive damages." (Jabro v. Superior Court (2002) 95 Cal.App.4th 754, 758.) "Very likely" means more than a reasonable probability, and more than a prima facie showing of the kind needed to defeat summary judgment. (Id.)

Tonna presents a declaration from her counsel attaching excerpts of her deposition transcript. (Gilg Decl., Ex. 1.) The deposition transcript recounts that Tonna went to view a property that broker Hawco was showing, Hawco refused Tonna admission to the property, Hawco grabbed Tonna's arm and left a bruise, Hawco pushed her out of the property's garage, and Hawco threatened her with an object resembling a tennis racket. Tonna also presents photos of Hawco with the racket (id., Ex. 2), and medical records from her subsequent ER visit reflecting stress and elevated heart rate that she attributes to the interaction with Hawco (id., Ex. 3.).

Hawco presents a declaration recounting his encounter with Tonna and her husband Roger Tonna. According to Hawco's declaration, Tonna and Roger Tonna were the aggressors, announcing their intention to beat him up, and Hawco grabbed a lightweight electric swatter to defend himself. (Hawco Decl., para. 12.) Hawco further avers that he never touched Tonna. (Id. para. 15.)

On reply Tonna presents a declaration from her real estate agent, Melissa Echeverria, attesting that she witnessed the interaction over videoconference and generally corroborating Tonna's version of events. The court exercises its discretion to receive Echeverria's declaration as evidence on reply.

Nonetheless, weighing the evidence presented on this motion, the court does not find that it is very likely that Tonna will prevail on her claim for punitive damages. The evidence presented by both parties is flatly contradictory of the other's claim, but neither party's evidence is so persuasive or of such superior quality (or alternatively, neither party's evidence lacks credibility on its face) such that the court can find one party or the other more likely to prevail, much less very likely. Because Tonna has not met her burden on this motion of showing it is very likely she will succeed in obtaining punitive damages, the motion is denied. {End of part 1 of 2 of the tentative ruling]. =(301/CVA) | |