Judge: Audra Mori, Case: 19STCV42179, Date: 2022-12-15 Tentative Ruling



 
 
 
 
 


Case Number: 19STCV42179    Hearing Date: December 15, 2022    Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

 

RUZANNA KOSHKARIAN,

                        Plaintiff(s),

            vs.

 

CITY OF LOS ANGELES, ET AL.,

 

                        Defendant(s).

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

      CASE NO: 19STCV42179

 

[TENTATIVE] ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S UNOPPOSED MOTION TO COMPEL PLAINTIFF’S DEPOSITION

 

Dept. 31

1:30 p.m.

December 15, 2022

 

Defendant County of Los Angeles (“Defendant”) moves to compel Plaintiff Ruzanna Koshkarian’s (“Plaintiff”) deposition.  Defendant asserts it has noticed Plaintiff’s deposition multiple times.  Most recently, on October 7, 2022, Defendant noticed Plaintiff’s deposition for November 1, 2022, after confirming the date was firm with Plaintiff’s counsel.  However, the day before the deposition, Plaintiff’s counsel emailed Defendant that Plaintiff would not be attending the deposition.  Plaintiff did not appear for the deposition, and an affidavit of non-appearance was taken.  (Mot. Exh. 9.) 

 

CCP § 2025.450(a) provides, “If, after service of a deposition notice, a party to the action or an officer, director, managing agent, or employee of a party, or a person designated by an organization that is a party under Section 2025.230, 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, electronically stored information, or tangible thing 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, electronically stored information, or tangible thing described in the deposition notice.”  CCP § 2025.450 requires the Court to compel the deposition unless it finds a valid objection was served under § 2025.410.

 

Here, Defendant asserts it met and conferred with Plaintiff multiple times about Plaintiff’s deposition, but Plaintiff has not appeared for deposition or provided alternative dates after failing to appear on November 1, 2022.  Any opposition to the motion was due by December 2, 2022.  To date, no opposition has been filed. 

 

The motion to compel is unopposed and granted.  (CCP § 2025.450(a).)  Plaintiff Ruzanna Koshkarian is ordered to appear for deposition at a date, time, and location to be noticed by Defendant.  Defendant must give at least ten days’ notice of the deposition (notice extended per Code if by other than personal service).

 

CCP § 2025.450(g)(1) requires the Court to impose sanctions unless it finds the deponent acted with substantial justification or there are circumstances that render imposition of sanctions unjust.  Defendant is awarded two hours for preparing the motion and one hour for appearing at the hearing all at the requested rate of $180 per hour, for a total attorney fees award of $540.00.  Further, Defendant is awarded the Court Reporter’s fee of $832.70 for the transcript outlining Plaintiff’s non-appearance as costs. 

 

Sanctions are sought and imposed against Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s attorney of record, jointly and severally.  They are ordered to pay sanctions to Defendant, by and through its attorney of record, in the total amount of $1,372.70, within twenty days. 

 

Defendant is ordered to give notice. 

 

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE:

 

Dated this 15th day of December 2022

 

 

 

 

Hon. Audra Mori

Judge of the Superior Court