NoticeCal. Super. - 3rd Dist.January 15, 2014~ o HY D B vA & \o 10 il 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 | 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -_ Pa ~~ oN 6078-090670155 2017090609:33 Page 2: ) ANCY s Fi i. ED i NANCY Q. SU, SBN 279714 uperior Court of California RESURGENCE LEGAL GROUP, PC County of Placer 10805 Holder Street, Suite 205 \ Cypress, CA 90630 SEP 08 2017 (T) 877/440-0860 (F) 714/226-0024 Jake Chatters EMAIL: CAAttorney@ResurgenceLegal.com Executive Clerk By: B. Dgputy Refer to File Number: CA034719 Attorney for Plaintiff SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF PLACER, PLACER JUDICIAL DISTRICT BILL SANTUCCI JUSTICE CENTER RESURGENCE CAPITAL, LLC, CASE NO.: MCV0060300 Plaintiff NOTICE OF RULING GRANTING v. MOTION TO COMPEL ENCHANTED E DOUTHERD A/K/A HEARING ENCHANTED E DOUTHERD BODINE DATE: August 10, 2017 A/K/A ENCHANTED DOUTHEREDBODIN, TIME: 8:30 a.m. and DOES | through [5 inclusive DEPT: 32 Defendant(s). N e Ne e? Se e? Se e Se e? Se e Se ne e! Se e Se e Se ? Se t” Sg t! S e t To Defendant and all counsels of record: Please take notice that the Court, having reviewed and considered all papers on file and argument of counsel, and the matter having been submitted, ordered as follows: The Motion to Compel is GRANTED. Defendant is ordered to provide code compliant responses (verified and without objections) to Request No. 1 (Specially Prepared Interrogatories) and No, 2 (Production of Documents) on or before August 25, 2017. Defendant to pay the Plaintiff $260.00 in sanctions. Admissions by Defendant have been deemed Admitted. DATED: August 31, 2017 Respectfully submitted, RESURGENCE LEGAL GROUP, PC By: NANCY Q, SU Attorney for Plaintiff File By Fax ( A a > aan ~ } 6018-090670155 2017090609:33 Page 3: ) These are the tentative rulings for civil law and motion matters set for Thursday, August 10, 2017, at 8:30 a.m. in the Placer County Superior Court. The tentative ruling will be the court's final ruling unless notice of appearance and request for oral argument are given to all parties and the court by 4:00 p.m. today, Wednesday, August 9, 2017. Notice of request for oral argument to the court must be made by calling (916) 408-6481. Requests for oral argument made by any other method will not be accepted. Prevailing parties are required to submit orders after hearing to the court within 10 court days of the scheduled hearing date, and after approval as to form by opposing counsel. Court reporters are not provided by the court. Parties may provide a court reporter at their own expense. EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE NOTED, THESE TENTATIVE RULINGS ARE ISSUED BY COMMISSIONER MICHAEL A. JACQUES AND IF ORAL ARGUMENT IS REQUESTED, ORAL ARGUMENT WILL BE HEARD IN DEPARTMENT 40, LOCATED AT 10820 JUSTICE CENTER DRIVE, ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA. 1. M-CV-0060300 Resurgence Capital, LLC vs. Doutherd, Enchanted E. Plaintiff's motion to compel discovery is granted. Defendant Enchanted Doutherd shall provide verified responses and responsive documents, without objections, to specially prepared interrogatories and requests for production of documents on or before August 25, 2017. The matters encompassed in plaintiff's requests for admissions are deemed admitted. Sanctions in the amount of $260.00 are imposed on the defendant, Enchanted Doutherd, under Code of Civil Procedure section 2033.280(c). t=: i RE eee Plaintiff's motion for leave to file an amended complaint is denied without prejudice. The court may permit a party to amend its operative pleading in the furtherance of justice and on such terms as may be just. (Code of Civil Procedure section 473(a)(1); Code of Civil Procedure section 576.) The moving party must also show that the amendment will not prejudice any opposing party. (Douglas v. Superior Court (1989) 215 Cal. App.3d 155, 158.) Plaintiff, however, has failed to make a sufficient showing here. There are numerous deficiencies in the current request. First, the motion does not comply with the procedural requirements of California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1324(a). Plaintiff does not identify the page, paragraph, and line numbers for the additional language in the proposed first amended complaint. The amendments are presented not as an integrated pleading but apparently as additional language. It is very difficult to discern from the proposed pleading what allegations will be encompassed in the first amended complaint. File By Fax
