All topics
Motions to Compel Discovery
Motions to compel under California discovery statutes (CCP §§2030.300, 2031.310, 2025.450, et al.) ask the court to order a party to respond more fully to discovery, or appear for deposition. Sanctions are mandatory absent substantial justification. This page indexes motion-to-compel tentative rulings across California Superior Courts.
Rulings indexed
4,764
Counties
8
Judges
10
Outcome breakdown
- Granted1,996 (42%)
- Continued753 (16%)
- Denied722 (15%)
- Other684 (14%)
- Off calendar364 (8%)
- Granted in part167 (4%)
- Unspecified44 (1%)
- Moot34 (1%)
Recent examples
Browse all motions to compel discovery rulings →- Padilla Hernandez vs. Pacific Specialty Insurance Company26-01537689Orange County·Civil·Judge Andre Manssourian·Aug 28, 2026
- Chang vs. County of Orange25-01481350Orange County·Civil·Judge Andre Manssourian·Aug 28, 2026
- Reicherts vs. Farris25-01479895Orange County·Civil·Judge Andre Manssourian·Aug 28, 2026VACATED
- Hall vs. Rexel USA, Inc.24-01396185Orange County·Civil·Judge Andre Manssourian·Aug 28, 2026
- Gombu, LLC vs. Do Builder and Design, Inc.23-01367281Orange County·Civil·Judge Andre Manssourian·Aug 28, 2026CONTINUED
- Latrice Allen, as Administrator of the Estate of Ernest L. Allen, Sr. v. PHH Mortgage Service, et al.25STCV32836Los Angeles County·Civil·Judge Rolf M. Treu·Aug 27, 2026DENIED
- Jose Armenta v. Sonic Industries, Inc., et al.24STCV21989Los Angeles County·Civil·Judge Thomas D. Long·Aug 27, 2026DENIED
- IN RE: NATHANIEL ORMONDCPF26519730San Francisco County·Civil·Judge Harold E. Kahn·Aug 24, 2026Petitioner's petition to compel and request for sanctions is denied as moot without prejudice. Treasury Prime's request for sanctions is granted in part; Petitioner must pay $2,290.
- BRIGID ACUNA VS. THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA ET ALCGC25630898San Francisco County·Civil·Judge Harold E. Kahn·Aug 24, 2026Motion to compel further answer to form interrogatory 15.1 is granted and request for monetary sanctions is denied.
- BRIGID ACUNA VS. THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA ET ALCGC25630898San Francisco County·Civil·Judge Harold E. Kahn·Aug 24, 2026DENIED
- BRIGID ACUNA VS. THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA ET ALCGC25630898San Francisco County·Civil·Judge Harold E. Kahn·Aug 24, 2026DENIED
- LAURA CALCOTT AGNEW VS. FCS US LLC ET ALCGC25628508San Francisco County·Civil·Judge Harold E. Kahn·Aug 24, 2026DENIED as moot without prejudice
- YUQI LIN VS. FARALLON CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, LLC, A DELAWARE ET ALCGC25628154San Francisco County·Civil·Judge Not Specified·Aug 24, 2026GRANTED
- JENIFER HANKI VS. WAYMO LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY ET ALCGC25626060San Francisco County·Civil·Judge Harold E. Kahn·Aug 24, 2026GRANTED in part; Defendant to serve further verified responses by September 10, 2026.
- MEGAN BROGGER VS. NOCTURNAL CODE, UNKNOWN ENTITY ET ALCGC24613234San Francisco County·Civil·Judge Harold E. Kahn·Aug 24, 2026Off calendar
- Diaz v. American Honda Motor Co., Inc., et al.25PSCV02987Los Angeles County·Civil·Aug 24, 2026GRANTED in part and DENIED in part
- Timothy Silva vs Ryan Purkait25CV01202Santa Barbara County·Civil·Judge Colleen Sterne·Aug 24, 2026CONTINUED
- Janie S. Kim dba Janie K. Designs v. Roseark, Inc. and Roseark, LLC26STLC03144Los Angeles County·Civil·Aug 24, 2026CONTINUED
- Kevin Robinson v. Westside Loan Office26STLC00289Los Angeles County·Civil·Aug 24, 2026GRANTED in part, DENIED in part
- Brown v. Basmajyan, et. al.25SMCV04017Los Angeles County·Civil·Aug 24, 2026Motions to compel DENIED as MOOT; request for monetary sanctions GRANTED IN PART in the amount of $4,000
- Ami Pera, et al. v. American Honda Motor Co., Inc., et al.25TRCV02690Los Angeles County·Civil·Judge Amy N. Carter·Aug 24, 2026Motion to Compel Further Responses granted; Motion to Compel Deposition granted; Motion to Enforce Deposition Subpoena denied without prejudice
- Adventure Resort Marketing, LLC, (ARM) et al vs. B & W Resorts, Inc., dba Harmony Ridge Resort et alCU0002183Nevada County·Civil·Aug 24, 2026GRANTED
- Spencer Hodgin, et al. v. FCA US LLC25STCV19834Los Angeles County·Civil·Judge Spencer·Aug 24, 2026DENIED
- Brighten Investment Group, Inc. v. Walnut Education Time, Inc., et al.25STCV29824Los Angeles County·Civil·Judge Unknown·Aug 24, 2026Motions to compel GRANTED with $2,240 sanctions. Motion to disqualify DENIED. Motion to quash GRANTED.
- Timothy Silva vs Ryan Purkait25CV01202Santa Barbara County·Civil·Judge Colleen Sterne·Aug 24, 2026Tentative not yet posted
Related motion types
Frequently asked questions
What is a motions to compel discovery in California?+
Motions to compel under California discovery statutes (CCP §§2030.300, 2031.310, 2025.450, et al.) ask the court to order a party to respond more fully to discovery, or appear for deposition. Sanctions are mandatory absent substantial justification. This page indexes motion-to-compel tentative rulings across California Superior Courts.
How often are motions to compel discovery granted in California Superior Court?+
DecisionDepot tracks grant rates, denial rates, and outcome breakdowns for motions to compel discovery across 34+ California Superior Court counties. The live statistics on this page are derived from every indexed tentative ruling matching this motion type — updated continuously as new rulings arrive.