Obregon v. Superior Court
California Court of Appeal
[Opinion certified for partial publication.*]
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
ZEBROWSKI, J.—
I. Factual and Procedural History
Plaintiff and petitioner was employed at a Burger King franchise owned and operated by real party Cimm’s, Inc. (hereafter Cimm’s). Plaintiff sued Cimm’s and her former supervisor at Burger King for sexual harassment and related claims. The supervisor did not respond and his default was entered. Litigation proceeded against Cimm’s.
Plaintiff served form and special interrogatories on Cimm’s. Cimm’s served responses consisting of a mixture of factual answers and objections. Over five weeks passed without further action in this regard. Then,…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Greyhound Corp. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1961
- Vallbona v. SpringerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1996
- Laguna Auto Body v. Farmers Insurance ExchangeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1991
- Kuhns v. State of CaliforniaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1992
- Emerson Electric Co. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1997
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- St. Mary v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2014
- Benson v. Southern California Auto Sales, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2015
- Stewart v. Colonial Western Agency, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2001
- Fuller v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2001
- Sinaiko Healthcare Consulting, Inc. v. Pacific Healthcare ConsultantsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.