Lei Jiang, et al. v. Kevin Chu, et al.

6.12 million homes were sold nationally in 2021.7 Petitioners’ property could have been one of them, if they were not defrauded by Respondents. Facing the buyer’s lawsuit alleging breach of contract, specific performance, and damages, Petitioners raised an affirmative defense to rescind a counteroffer on the grounds of fraud. The complete communications between the real estate agents and the buyer during the incident are believed to provide direct evidence to determine whether Respondents conspired in the fraud and harassment. Respondents agreed to comply with the discovery requests to produce all the communications but failed to produce complete records. Petitioners’ subpoena to third-party phone providers for phone records also faced non-compliance. Despite Petitioners having established in court proceedings good cause to compel and that the records requested met all the required elements in relevant statutes, the trial court denied Petitioners’ Motion to Compel production of business records which contradicts the decisions in multiple similar cases in California Superior Courts. The denial of the motion effectively disregarded Petitioners’ due process rights to a fair trial and prevented Petitioners from obtaining sufficient evidence to establish their claims and defenses which would lead to Petitioners losing their property. The lack of legal stability could lead to State depriving person’s life, liberty, or property, without due process of law which is a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The question presented is: Whether the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment was violated when the California Superior