Tentative Rulings
Civil Tentative Rulings and Probate Examiner Recommendations are available below. All attempts possible are made to have the information on these pages updated by 3:00pm the day prior to hearing in order to allow for any needed continuances or travel if an appearance should be required.
Civil Tentative Rulings: The court does not issue tentative rulings on Writs of Attachment, Writs of Possession, Claims of Exemption, Claims of Right to Possession, Motions to Tax Costs After Trial, Motions for New Trial, or Motions to Continue Trial. Under California Rules of Court, rule 3.1308 and Local Rule 701, any party opposed to the tentative ruling must notify the court and other parties by 4:00 p.m. today of their intention to appear for oral argument. The court's notice must be made by facsimile (fax) to 559-733-6774; by email to research_attorney@tulare.courts.ca.gov; or by telephoning (559) 730-5010.
Probate Examiner Recommendations: For further information regarding a Visalia probate matter listed below you may contact the Visalia Probate Document Examiner at 559-730-5000 ext #2342. For further information regarding a SCJC probate matter listed below you may contact the SCJC Probate Document Examiner at 559-730-5000 ext #1430. The Probate Calendar Clerk may be reached at 559-730-5000 Option 4, then Option 6.
Civil Tentative Rulings & Probate Examiner Recommendations
The Tentative Rulings for Thursday, July 10, 2025, are:
Re: Carreon, Maria vs. Wawona Packing Co. LLC et al
Case No.: VCU297702
Date: July 10, 2025
Time: 8:30 A.M.
Dept. 1-The Honorable David C. Mathias
Motion: Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Initial Responses to (1) Form Interrogatories (2) Special Interrogatories and (3) Requests for Production of Documents; (4) Motion to Deem Admissions Admitted as to Defendant Wawona
Tentative Ruling: (1) through (4): To deny the motions; to deny the request for sanctions.
Facts and Analysis Common to (1) through (4)
In this wrongful death negligence action, Plaintiff served (1) Form Interrogatories (2) Special Interrogatories, (3) Requests for Production of Documents and (4) Requests for Admissions on August 2, 2023, as to Defendant Wawona.
On May 9, 2025, Defendant, Wawona Packing Co., LLC, produced unverified responses to (1) Form Interrogatories (2) Special Interrogatories, (3) Requests for Production of Documents and (4) Requests for Admissions.
These responses, however, are not attached to the motions filed in this case.
The Court acknowledges the general rule is that unsworn responses are tantamount to no responses. (Appleton v. Superior Court (1988) 206 Cal.App.3d 632, 636.) When no responses are received, there is no 45-day time limit to file a motion to compel initial responses or deem admissions admitted, and no meet and confer requirement. (Code Civ. Proc, § 2030.290(a).)
However, when responses consist solely of pure objections on various legal grounds, no client verification was required under Code of Civil Procedure §2031.250(a), the discovery has been responded to and the Court takes the position that a motion to compel further responses within the 45 day time period (plus service) is required, which necessitates a meet and confer process and separate statement.
The court in Food 4 Less Supermarkets,Inc v. Superior Court (1995) 40 Cal.App.4th 651, 657 summarizes this issue as follows:
“In contrast, subdivision (g) of section 2031 specifically provides that a response containing ‘only objections’ need not be signed by the party. The reason is clear. As Blue Ridge so cogently observed: ‘[O]bjections are legal conclusions interposed by counsel, not factual assertions by a party…’ [citation omitted] That is, an objection is based upon counsel's legal analysis of the matter (e.g., the document is privileged) as compared to a response which is based upon a party's factual representation of the matter (e.g., the document does not exist). There is absolutely no reason to require a party to verify an objection. It is sufficient to have the attorney sign the objection(s). If the attorney is wrong, the court will so decide after conducting the appropriate proceedings to determine if, for instance, the claim of privilege lies. Requiring the objection to be verified by the party would add nothing to the trial court's analysis. (emphasis in original.)
Section 2030.250(a), for instance, states an objection-only response need not be verified, an objection is a code-compliant response, an objection-only response cannot be construed as the equivalent of no response at all in the same way untimely or unverified substantive responses are considered. (See also sections 2033.230, 2033.240(a) as to admissions; sections 2030.240 and 2030.250 as to interrogatories.) According to Weil & Brown, “….the 45-day limit probably also applies where the response is unverified and includes only objection [Y]ou should serve your motion within 45 days of unverified objections.” (Civil Procedure Before Trial, Ch.8:1492.4.)
Therefore, it is unclear to the Court whether the unverified responses contained purely objections and whether the Court, therefore, requires motions to compel further responses, despite the lack of verification. The Court notes the 45-day period as to such motions expired June 25, 2025, which is 45 days plus two days for electronic service.
As such, the Court denies the motions and requests for sanctions.
If no one requests oral argument, under Code of Civil Procedure section 1019.5(a) and California Rules of Court, rule 3.1312(a), no further written order is necessary. The minute order adopting this tentative ruling will become the order of the court and service by the clerk will constitute notice of the order.
Re: Aidan Sollars vs. Visalia Unified School District a public entity
Case No.: VCU320906
Date: July 10, 2025
Time: 8:30 A.M.
Dept. 1-The Honorable David C. Mathias
Motion: Defendant’s Demurrer to Third Cause of Action
Tentative Ruling: An amended complaint has been filed by right and therefore the demurrer is off calendar.
If no one requests oral argument, under Code of Civil Procedure section 1019.5(a) and California Rules of Court, rule 3.1312(a), no further written order is necessary. The minute order adopting this tentative ruling will become the order of the court and service by the clerk will constitute notice of the order.