A judgment creditor of a $47 million judgment, as part of its efforts to enforce the judgment, propounded requests for production of documents pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 708.030 and later brought a motion to compel. The trial court granted the motion to compel and the judgment debtor appealed. After deciding it is not clear whether or not the order granting the motion to compel is appealable, the Court of Appeal treated the appeal as a petition for a writ of mandate because the judgment debtor would have no adequate remedy if the order granting the motion to compel is not appealable. The Court of Appeal then denied the petition, stating: “We conclude the trial court had authority under section 708.030 to compel [the judgment debtor] to produce documents in its possession or control regarding third parties, and we reject [the judgment debtor’s] contentions that [several of the requests] violate the privacy rights of third parties and that [other requests] are overbroad.” (SCC Acquisitions, Inc. v. Sup. Ct. (Western Albuquerque Land Holdings, LLC) (Cal. App. Fourth Dist., Div. 3; January 6, 2016) 243 Cal.App.4th 741, [196 Cal.Rptr.3d 533].)Discovery Propounded By Judgment Creditor.
A judgment creditor of a $47 million judgment, as part of its efforts to enforce the judgment, propounded requests for production of documents pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 708.030 and later brought a motion to compel. The trial court granted the motion to compel and the judgment debtor appealed. After deciding it is not clear whether or not the order granting the motion to compel is appealable, the Court of Appeal treated the appeal as a petition for a writ of mandate because the judgment debtor would have no adequate remedy if the order granting the motion to compel is not appealable. The Court of Appeal then denied the petition, stating: “We conclude the trial court had authority under section 708.030 to compel [the judgment debtor] to produce documents in its possession or control regarding third parties, and we reject [the judgment debtor’s] contentions that [several of the requests] violate the privacy rights of third parties and that [other requests] are overbroad.” (SCC Acquisitions, Inc. v. Sup. Ct. (Western Albuquerque Land Holdings, LLC) (Cal. App. Fourth Dist., Div. 3; January 6, 2016) 243 Cal.App.4th 741, [196 Cal.Rptr.3d 533].)