Kramer

Kramer v. Dale CA4/1

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 24, 2021D077610California7,092 words

Opinion

Opinion

Filed 9/24/21 Kramer v. Dale CA4/

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

KYLE KRAMER, D077610

Plaintiff and Appellant,

v. (Super. Ct. No. 37-2017- 00003140-CU-WM-NC) MARK A. DALE et al.,

Defendants and Respondents.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Robert P. Dahlquist, Judge. Affirmed. Sharif Faust Lawyers, Matthew J. Faust and Khodadad D. Sharif for Plaintiff and Appellant. Business Law Group and Joseph A. Lara for Defendants and Respondents. Kyle Kramer appeals an order compelling him to produce supplemental discovery responses and awarding sanctions to the moving parties in the amount of $12,250 for misuse of the discovery process. However, Kramer only…

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.