Judge: Anne Hwang, Case: 21STCV17680, Date: 2023-08-17 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV17680    Hearing Date: August 17, 2023    Dept: 32

PLEASE NOTE:   Parties are encouraged to meet and confer concerning this tentative ruling to determine if a resolution may be reached.  If the parties are unable to reach a resolution and a party intends to submit on this tentative ruling, the party must send an email to the Court at sscdept32@lacourt.org indicating that party’s intention to submit.  The email shall include the case number, date and time of the hearing, counsel’s contact information (if applicable), and the identity of the party submitting on this tentative ruling.  If the Court does not receive an email indicating the parties are submitting on this tentative ruling and there are no appearances at the hearing, the Court may place the motion off calendar or adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the Court.  If all parties do not submit on this tentative ruling, they should arrange to appear in-person or remotely.  Further, after the Court has posted/issued a tentative ruling, the Court has the inherent authority to prohibit the withdrawal of the subject motion and adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the Court. 

TENTATIVE RULING

MOTION

            Plaintiff Jarod Melton (“Plaintiff”) initiated this negligence action against Defendants Cecilia Richardson and Pamela Ann Moore (“Defendants”) based on a motor vehicle accident that occurred on May 15, 2019 when Plaintiff was operating a city bus owned by Long Beach Transit.

Defendants now move to compel the deposition of Plaintiff and requests monetary sanctions against Plaintiff in the amount of $718.99.  No opposition has been filed.

ANALYSIS

Code of Civil Procedure § 2025.450 provides that if a party to the action fails to appear for deposition after service of a deposition notice and the party has not served a valid objection to that deposition notice, the party that noticed the deposition may move for an order to compel the deponent’s attendance and testimony.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 2025.450, subd. (a).) 

Here, on September 17, 2021, Defendants, through counsel, served a deposition notice on Plaintiff, and the deposition was originally noticed for December 15, 2021. (Morse Decl. ¶ 2, Exh. A.) No objections were served at this time. (Morse Decl. ¶ 2.) On October 26, 2021, Defendants’ counsel notified Plaintiff that the disposition was rescheduled for March 1, 2022. (Morse Decl. ¶ 3, Exh. B.) Later, on February 25, 2022, Plaintiff’s deposition was taken off-calendar because Plaintiff’s prior-counsel needed further authorization from Plaintiff to continue the representation. (Morse Decl. ¶ 4.) After the Court granted Plaintiff’s prior-counsel’s motion to be relieved as counsel on March 14, 2022, Defendants’ counsel directly served Plaintiff with notice of his deposition, which was scheduled for April 12, 2023 at 10:00 AM. (Morse Decl. ¶¶ 6-7, Exh. C.) Defendants’ counsel attests that objections were never served. (Morse Decl. ¶ 7.) On the date of Plaintiff’s scheduled deposition, Plaintiff failed to appear. (Morse Decl. ¶ 8.) Thereafter, on April 21, 2023, Defendants’ counsel attempted to meet and confer with Plaintiff by mail to discover why he failed to appear for his noticed deposition and to reschedule the deposition, but Plaintiff failed to respond. (Morse Decl. ¶¶ 9-10, Exh. F.)

Because Plaintiff failed to appear for his deposition and his testimony is necessary for Defendants to properly evaluate this case, the instant motion has merit.

Defendants also seek monetary sanctions in connection with the motion in the amount of $718.99. This amount consists of the court’s reporter and certificate of non-appearance fee of $337, the filing fee of $61.65, and one hour for preparing the instant motion and one hour appearing for the instant motion at a rate of $160.17. (Morse Decl. ¶ 11.) Because Plaintiff has failed to file an opposition to explain why he failed to appear for his noticed deposition, the Court grants the request for sanctions. (Code Civ. Proc. § 2025.450, subd. (g)(1).)

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

Therefore, the Court grants Defendants’ Motion for Order that Plaintiff Must Appear and Testify at Deposition, and orders Plaintiff to appear for the deposition.  However, the requested date of August 23, 2023 is too soon, given the need to provide notice of the Court’s order.  Accordingly, Plaintiff is ordered to appear for the deposition on August 30, 2023 at 1:00 p.m., unless Defendant’s stipulate otherwise or notice a different time.[1]

In addition, the Court grants Defendants’ request for monetary sanctions in the amount of $718.99. Plaintiff is ordered to tender payment to Defendants’ attorney of record within 30 days of notice of the Court’s order.

Defendants are ordered to provide notice of the Court’s orders and file a proof of service of such.