Docket No. 19929. November 7, 1980. COUNSEL Harrison Smith, D.D. Hughmanick, James L. Stoelker, John R. Mullen and Daniel McLoughlin for Petitioners. No appearance for Respondent. Lee A. Lopez for Real Parties in Interest. OPINION PUGLIA, P.J. Petitioners are defendants in a quiet title action pending in the respondent superior court. By this application for a writ of mandate, they seek review of the trial court's order denying their motion to compel responses to interrogatories and for sanctions
Docket No. 38600. January 12, 1972. COUNSEL Ronald M. Sohigian and Samuel Shore for Petitioners. Robert E. Cartwright, Edward I. Pollock, Theodore A. Horn, Marvin E. Lewis, William H. Lally, Joseph W. Cotchett, Leonard Sack and Elmer Low as Amici Curiae on behalf of Petitioners. No appearance for Respondent. Bonne, Jones Bridges, Bruce J. Bonne, Horvitz Minikes, Ellis J. Horvitz and Morton Minikes for Real Parties in Interest. OPINION KAUS, P.J. In this mandate proceeding petitioners ("plaintiffs")
(a) The interrogatories and the response thereto shall not be filed with the court. (b) The propounding party shall retain both the original of the interrogatories, with the original proof of service affixed to them, and the original of the sworn response until six months after final disposition of the action. At that time, both originals may be destroyed, unless the court on motion of any party and for good cause shown orders that the originals be preserved for a longer period. Ca. Civ. Proc. Code
(a) Separate statement required Except as provided in (b), any motion involving the content of a discovery request or the responses to such a request must be accompanied by a separate statement. The motions that require a separate statement include a motion: (1) To compel further responses to requests for admission; (2) To compel further responses to interrogatories; (3) To compel further responses to a demand for inspection of documents or tangible things; (4) To compel answers at a deposition;