MARTIN FUSS, Petitioner, v. THE SUPERIOR COURT OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY, Respondent; JEROME B. ROSENTHAL et al., Real Parties in Interest, 273 Cal. App. 2d 807

Summary

The law firm brought an action against the client for services rendered. When the law firm refused to comply with discovery, the client filed a motion to compel the production of documents, the answer to certain interrogatories, and the answer to certain questions in the deposition. The trial court denied the client's motions and the client filed an application for a writ of mandamus. The court issued a writ of mandamus and required the trial court to enter a new order. The court found that an order of the trial court was reviewable by mandamus, but review was limited to a determination of whether the trial court abused its discretion. The court determined that the law firm's response to the interrogatories were not sufficient, as required by Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 2030(c). The law firm failed to object to the interrogatories within the statutory time for response and failed to show a good cause for the failure. The court held that the law firm was required to furnish time summaries, ...