Charles
Charles v. Target Corporation
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 CHERYL CHARLES, Case No. 20-cv-07854-HSG (JSC)
Plaintiff,
ORDER RE: DISCOVERY DISPUTE
v. 9 Re: Dkt. No. 28 TARGET CORPORATION, Defendant.
12 Now pending before the Court is a discovery dispute joint letter regarding Plaintiff’s request to inspect and test the aisle where Plaintiff allegedly slipped and fell. (Dkt. No. 28.) After reviewing the parties’ submission, the Court concludes that oral argument is not necessary. See N.D. Cal. Civ. L.R. 7-1(b). “A party may serve on any other party a request within the scope of Rule 26(b): . . . (2) to permit entry onto designated land or other property possessed or controlled by the responding party, so that the requesting party may inspect, measure, survey, photograph, test, or sample the property or any designated object or operation on it.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 34(a)(2) (emphasis added). Thus, Plaintiff’s request is made in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Defendant’s insistence that…