Maldonado

Maldonado v. Superior Court

Good Law
115 Cal. Rptr. 2d 137·2002 Cal. App. LEXIS 22·2002 Daily Journal DAR 207·94 Cal. App. 4th 1390·2002 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 162
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 7, 2002B153616California3,484 words

Opinion

Opinion

Curry, J.

Petitioners Oscar Maldonado, J. Miguel Ibarra, Gustavo C. Gomez, and Faustino Boria brought a petition for writ of mandate seeking to overturn the order of the trial court denying their motions to compel further responses to discovery from real party in interest ICG Telecom Group, Inc. (ICG). We agree with petitioners that ICG’s responses were inadequate, and issue a peremptory writ of mandate directing the respondent court to vacate its order denying petitioners’ motions to compel further responses and enter a new and different order granting the motions.

Factual and Procedural Background

Petitioners brought suit against their former employer ICG, and codefendants Holly Horchover and Patricia M. Haley, alleging employment discrimination. Petitioners apparently claim that their termination or “coerced resignation” was tied to a policy of ICG’s known as “footprinting,” which petitioners describe as “the racially based segregation of Los Angeles into regions where sales and services would be provided by [ICG] and where sales and service would not be provided.”

Petitioners submitted three deposition notices to ICG seeking to depose the person or persons most knowledgeable…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.