Deyo v. Kilbourne
84 Cal.App.3d 771 (Cal. Ct. App. 1978) Cited 154 times 2 Legal AnalysesIn Deyo, it was held that the materiality of questions propounded to a particular claim or a defense should be considered as a factor in assessing the propriety of entering a dismissal or a default judgment for failure to answer.
Coito v. Superior Court (State of California)
54 Cal.4th 480 (Cal. 2012) Cited 54 times 4 Legal AnalysesIn Coito, one party's counsel attempted to use the efforts of the other party's counsel to find witnesses and information about the case that was readily available to both parties.
Hernandez v. Superior Court
112 Cal.App.4th 285 (Cal. Ct. App. 2003) Cited 67 timesDenying appellant's request to order the action assigned to a new judge where the challenged orders “do not suggest bias or whimsy on behalf of the court, only frustration and a desire to manage a complex case”
Section 2031.240 - Objections
Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 2031.240 Cited 19 times(a) If only part of an item or category of item in a demand for inspection, copying, testing, or sampling is objectionable, the response shall contain a statement of compliance, or a representation of inability to comply with respect to the remainder of that item or category. (b) If the responding party objects to the demand for inspection, copying, testing, or sampling of an item or category of item, the response shall do both of the following: (1) Identify with particularity any document, tangible