This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 06/12/2019 at 01:34:53 (UTC).

JAN SLORT VS. STEVEN E. MYERS

Case Summary

On 03/07/2016 JAN SLORT filed a Property - Other Real Property lawsuit against STEVEN E MYERS. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Burbank Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The case status is Disposed - Judgment Entered.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****4985

  • Filing Date:

    03/07/2016

  • Case Status:

    Disposed - Judgment Entered

  • Case Type:

    Property - Other Real Property

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Burbank Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

 

Party Details

Plaintiffs

SLORT JAN

SLORT DAVID J.

Defendants

MYERS STEVEN E.

MYERS LINELL A.

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorneys

WALLRAFF LAW

LAW WALLRAFF

Defendant Attorneys

LAW OFFICES OF JOHN G. WURM

ROBERT HIRSCHMAN & ASSOCIATES

 

Court Documents

Notice of Entry of Judgment or Order

7/3/2018: Notice of Entry of Judgment or Order

Unknown

10/31/2018: Unknown

Unknown

11/8/2018: Unknown

 

Docket Entries

  • 11/08/2018
  • Notice of Rejection - Post Judgment; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/31/2018
  • Request For Copies; Filed by Steven E. Myers (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/09/2018
  • Abstract of Judgment - Civil and Small Claims; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/09/2018
  • Abstract of Judgment - Civil and Small Claims; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/05/2018
  • Abstract of Judgment - Civil and Small Claims; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/08/2018
  • Notice of Case Relocation Rescheduling; Filed by Plaintiff

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/13/2018
  • Notice of Case Relocation Rescheduling; Filed by Plaintiff

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/03/2018
  • Notice of Entry of Judgment or Order

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/03/2018
  • Notice of Entry of Judgment; Filed by Steven E. Myers (Defendant); Linell A. Myers (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/17/2018
  • Amended/Corrected Judgment

    Read MoreRead Less
75 More Docket Entries
  • 08/04/2016
  • Minute order entered: 2016-08-04 00:00:00; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/23/2016
  • at 08:30 AM in Department B; Order to Show Cause Re: Failure to File Proof of Service - Not Held - Advanced and Vacated

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/07/2016
  • Cross-Compl fld - Summons Issued; Filed by Steven E. Myers (Defendant); Linell A. Myers (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/07/2016
  • Answer; Filed by Steven E. Myers (Defendant); Linell A. Myers (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/04/2016
  • Answer; Filed by Defendant

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/21/2016
  • Notice; Filed by Jan Slort (Plaintiff); David J. Slort (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/07/2016
  • Complaint filed-Summons Issued; Filed by null

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/07/2016
  • OSC-Failure to File Proof of Serv; Filed by Court

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/07/2016
  • Summons; Filed by null

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/07/2016
  • Notice of Case Management Conference; Filed by Court

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: EC064985    Hearing Date: November 08, 2019    Dept: A

Slort v Myers

Discovery Motions

Calendar:

15

Case No.:

EC064985

Hearing Date:

November 08, 2019

Action Filed:

March 07, 2016

Judgment:

December 15, 2017

MP:

Defendants Steven E. Myers and Linell A. Myers

RP:

N/A

ALLEGATIONS:

In this action, Plaintiffs Jan Slort (“Plaintiff”) alleges he purchased residential property from Defendants/Cross-Complainants Steve and Linell Myers (“Defendants”), pursuant to a purchase agreement on July 25, 2001. Plaintiff alleges he was cited by LADBS for not having a permit on the barn and claimed he spent $100,000 to comply with the municipal code and get a permit.

Defendants prevailed at trial on October 16, 2017, and judgment was entered in their favor on December 15, 2017.

PRESENTATION:

Defendants moves to compel Plaintiff to respond to their Requests for Production on October 01, 2019, and Special Interrogatories on October 16, 2019. At the initial October 25, 2019, hearing, the Court continued the motions to November 08, 2019, to satisfy the notice requirements under Code of Civ. Proc. §1005.

RELIEF REQUESTED:

Defendants move to compel Plaintiff to respond to Special Interrogatories and Requests for Production.

DISCUSSION:

Standard of Review – Under Code of Civ. Proc. §§708.020 & 708.030, judgment creditors may propound Requests for Production and Interrogatories following judgment, in order to aid in the enforcement of a money judgment. The judgment creditor discovery provisions incorporate the rights and protections under Chapters 13 & 14, Code of Civ. Proc. §§2030.010 et seq. and 2031.010 et seq. A motion to compel responses may be brought where a responding party fails to timely respond to written discovery. Code of Civ. Proc. §2031.300. No meet and confer is necessary where a party fails to respond to written discovery. See Leach v. Superior Court (1980) 111 Cal. App. 3d 902, 906. Sanctions are mandatory for a party making or opposing a motion, except when the party making or opposing the motion is determined by the Court to have been acting with substantial justification, or that other circumstances would render the imposition of sanctions unjust. Code of Civ. Proc. §2031.300(c).

On review of the moving papers, the Declaration of Robert Hirschman, and the Exhibits attached thereto, the Court finds good cause for granting the motion. As to the issue of sanctions, the Court considers that no opposition has been filed, rendering sanctions unavailable under the code.

Accordingly, the Court will grant the motion to compel and deny as to sanctions.

---

RULING:

In the event the parties submit on this tentative ruling, or a party requests a signed order or the court in its discretion elects to sign a formal order, the following form will be either electronically signed or signed in hard copy and entered into the court’s records.

ORDER

Defendants Steven E. Myers and Linell A. Myers’s Motions to Compel Requests for Production and Special Interrogatories came on regularly for hearing on November 08, 2019, with appearances/submissions as noted in the minute order for said hearing, and the court, being fully advised in the premises, did then and there rule as follows:

THE MOTIONS ARE GRANTED; AND

SANCTIONS ARE DENIED.

DATE: _______________ _______________________________

JUDGE

Case Number: EC064985    Hearing Date: October 25, 2019    Dept: A

Slort v Myers

Post-Judgment Discovery Motions

Calendar:

16

Case No.:

EC064985

Hearing Date:

October 25, 2019

Action Filed:

March 07, 2016

Judgment:

December 15, 2017

MP:

Defendants Steven E. Myers and Linell A. Myers

RP:

N/A

ALLEGATIONS:

In this action, Plaintiffs Jan Slort (“Plaintiff”) alleges he purchased residential property from Defendants/Cross-Complainants Steve and Linell Myers (“Defendants”), pursuant to a purchase agreement on July 25, 2001. Plaintiff alleges he was cited by LADBS for not having a permit on the barn and claimed he spent $100,000 to comply with the municipal code and get a permit.

Defendants prevailed at trial on October 16, 2017, and judgment was entered in their favor on December 15, 2017.

PRESENTATION:

Defendants moves to compel Plaintiff to respond to their Requests for Production on October 01, 2019, and Special Interrogatories on October 16, 2019. Service for both motions occurred on September 27, 2019, via mail.

RELIEF REQUESTED:

Defendants move to compel Plaintiff to respond to Special Interrogatories and Requests for Production.

DISCUSSION:

Procedural Error – As an initial matter, the Court notes it is untimely. As provided in Code of Civ. Proc. §1005(b) “all moving and supporting papers shall be served and filed at least 16 court days before the hearing.” Here, the Motion to Compel Special Interrogatories was not filed until October 16, 2019 – 7 Court days before the hearing – rather than the latest possible date of October 02, 2019.

Accordingly, the Court will continue the Motion to Compel Special Interrogatories until November 8 or later in order to permit time for opposition to be filed.

---

 

Standard of Review – Under Code of Civ. Proc. §708.030, judgment creditors may propound Requests for Production following judgment, in order to aid in the enforcement of a money judgment. The judgment creditor discovery provisions incorporate the rights and protections under Chapter 14, Code of Civ. Proc. §2031.010 et seq. A motion to compel responses may be brought where a responding party fails to timely respond to written discovery. Code of Civ. Proc. §2031.300. No meet and confer is necessary where a party fails to respond to written discovery. See Leach v. Superior Court (1980) 111 Cal. App. 3d 902, 906. Sanctions are mandatory for a party making or opposing a motion, except when the party making or opposing the motion is determined by the Court to have been acting with substantial justification, or that other circumstances would render the imposition of sanctions unjust. Code of Civ. Proc. §2031.300(c).

On review of the moving papers, the Declaration of Robert Hirschman, and the Exhibits attached thereto, the Court finds good cause for granting the motion. As to the issue of sanctions, the Court considers that no opposition has been filed, making the application of the sanctions provision moot.

Accordingly, the Court will note probable grant when the motion to compel and probable denial as to sanctions when the motion can be properly heard.

---

RULING: Continue hearing

In the event the parties submit on this tentative ruling, or a party requests a signed order or the court in its discretion elects to sign a formal order, the following form will be either electronically signed or signed in hard copy and entered into the court’s records.

ORDER

Defendants Steven E. Myers and Linell A. Myers’s Motions to Compel Requests for Production and Special Interrogatories came on regularly for hearing on October 25, 2019, with appearances/submissions as noted in the minute order for said hearing, and the court, being fully advised in the premises, did then and there rule as follows:

THE MOTION TO COMPEL SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES IS CONTINUED TO ON OR AFTER NOVEMBER 08, 2019, PURSUANT TO CODE OF CIV. PROC. §1005;

DATE: _______________ _______________________________

JUDGE