Judge: Anne Hwang, Case: 22STCV30841, Date: 2024-04-17 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV30841    Hearing Date: April 17, 2024    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

BACKGROUND

            Defendant Michelle D. Minott (“Defendant”) moves to compel Plaintiff Alejandro Hernandez Ignacio’s (“Plaintiff” in pro per) deposition. No opposition has been filed.

LEGAL STANDARD

“If, after service of a deposition notice, a party to the action . . . , without having served a valid objection under Section 2025.410, fails to appear for examination, or to proceed with it, or to produce for inspection any document . . . described in the deposition notice, the party giving the notice may move for an order compelling the deponent’s attendance and testimony, and the production for inspection of any document . . . described in the deposition notice.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 2025.450, subd. (a).)

“A motion under subdivision (a) [above] shall comply with both of the following:

1. The motion shall set forth specific facts showing good cause justifying the production for inspection of any document, electronically stored information, or tangible thing described in the deposition notice.

2. The motion shall be accompanied by a meet and confer declaration under Section 2016.040, or, when the deponent fails to attend the deposition and produce the documents, electronically stored information, or things described in the deposition notice, by a declaration stating that the petitioner has contacted the deponent to inquire about the nonappearance.”

(Code Civ. Proc., § 2025.450, subd. (b).)

If a motion is granted, the court shall impose a monetary sanction in favor of that party unless the court finds that the one subject to the sanction acted with substantial justification or that other circumstances make the sanction unjust. (Code Civ. Proc. § 2025.450 (g).)

MEET AND CONFER

The Declaration of Denise A. Smith-Mars does not state that counsel attempted to contact Plaintiff regarding the non-appearance. Therefore, the meet and confer requirement has not been met.

DISCUSSION

On July 25, 2023, the Court granted Plaintiff’s former counsel’s motion to be relieved as counsel. Plaintiff is currently self-represented.

Here, on September 14, 2023, Defendant mailed notice of Plaintiff’s deposition, set for October 16, 2023. (Smith-Mars Decl. ¶ 2, Exh. A.) On the date of the deposition, Plaintiff failed to appear, and Defendant obtained a certificate of non-appearance. (Id. ¶ 3, Exh. B.) Notice of this motion was served on Plaintiff by mail. Therefore, because it does not appear that Plaintiff timely objected to the deposition, and does not oppose this motion, the motion to compel is granted.

Defendant requests $860 in monetary sanctions. However, the Court declines to award sanctions since Defendant did not meet and confer prior to bringing this motion.

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

Accordingly, Defendant’s motion to compel Plaintiff’s deposition is GRANTED. Plaintiff Alejandro Hernandez Ignacio shall appear within 15 days’ notice of this order for a deposition, accounting for extra time under Code of Civil Procedure section 1013 if applicable.

Defendant shall provide notice of the Court’s ruling and file a proof of service of such.