Greyhound Corp. v. Superior Court
56 Cal.2d 355 (Cal. 1961) Cited 291 times 3 Legal AnalysesIn Greyhound, the plaintiff in a personal injury suit arising from a car accident sought written statements that had been obtained from witnesses by the defendant's insurance adjusters and investigators.
Flagship Theatres of Palm Desert, LLC v. Century Theatres, Inc.
198 Cal.App.4th 1366 (Cal. Ct. App. 2011) Cited 30 timesNoting federal law's antitrust injury requirement applies to claims under the Cartwright Act
Colonial Life Accident Ins. Co. v. Superior Court
31 Cal.3d 785 (Cal. 1982) Cited 60 times 2 Legal AnalysesRuling that based on California's version of Rule 26(b), encompassing an identical minimal relevance standard, "Colonial's suggestion that the discovery of other insureds whose claims were negotiated by Sharkey will not yield relevant, admissible evidence, is patently meritless"
Emerson Elec. Co. v. Superior Court
16 Cal.4th 1101 (Cal. 1997) Cited 32 times 3 Legal AnalysesDocket No. S057119. December 1, 1997. Appeal from Superior Court of Los Angeles County, No. MC006881, Ross Amspoker, Temporary Judge. Pursuant to California Constitution, article VI, section 21. COUNSEL Hennelly Grossfeld, John J. Hennelly and Susan J. Williams for Petitioners. Hugh F. Young, Jr., Jan S. Amundson, Harvey M. Grossman, Sherman Joyce, Crowell Moring, Victor E. Schwartz, Mark A. Behrens, Nabil W. Istafanous, D. Dudley Oldham, Pepper, Hamilton Scheetz, Alfred W. Cortese, Jr., Kathleen
Korea Data Systems Co. v. Superior Court
51 Cal.App.4th 1513 (Cal. Ct. App. 1997) Cited 17 timesIn Korea Data, supra, 51 Cal.App.4th 1513, the defendant served the plaintiff with a request for production of documents.
Best Prods., Inc. v. Superior Court
119 Cal.App.4th 1181 (Cal. Ct. App. 2004) Cited 9 timesDefining privilege log
Burke v. Superior Court
71 Cal.2d 276 (Cal. 1969) Cited 54 timesIn Burke the defendant in an action on an attachment bond defended against a claim for the expenses incurred in winning the underlying action, by claiming, through denials, that the attachment could have been dissolved without winning the case on its merits.
Singer v. Superior Court
54 Cal.2d 318 (Cal. 1960) Cited 44 timesIn Singer v. Superior Court, 54 Cal.2d 318 [ 5 Cal.Rptr. 697, 353 P.2d 305], cited by the Court of Appeal, it was held that answers to such questions should be required when propounded by written interrogatories; but such a situation is clearly different from that presented on the oral deposition of a layman.
Section 22350 - Driving at speed greater than reasonable or prudent prohibited
Cal. Veh. Code § 22350 Cited 278 timesRequiring drivers to drive no faster than conditions safely permit
Section 2033.290 - Motion compelling further response
Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 2033.290 Cited 66 times(a) On receipt of a response to requests for admissions, the party requesting admissions may move for an order compelling a further response if that party deems that either or both of the following apply: (1) An answer to a particular request is evasive or incomplete. (2) An objection to a particular request is without merit or too general. (b) (1) A motion under subdivision (a) shall be accompanied by a meet and confer declaration under Section 2016.040. (2) In lieu of a separate statement required
Section 2033.210 - Requirements
Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 2033.210 Cited 19 times(a) The party to whom requests for admission have been directed shall respond in writing under oath separately to each request. (b) Each response shall answer the substance of the requested admission, or set forth an objection to the particular request. (c) In the first paragraph of the response immediately below the title of the case, there shall appear the identity of the responding party, the set number, and the identity of the requesting party. (d) Each answer or objection in the response shall