Judge: Audra Mori, Case: 21STCV17484, Date: 2022-08-19 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV17484    Hearing Date: August 19, 2022    Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

Defendants Roselyn Valdez and Adam Leff (collectively, “Defendants”) move to compel Plaintiff Blanca Gamez’s deposition.  Defendants aver they have noticed Plaintiff’s deposition on multiple occasions.  Defendants assert that most recently, on January 7, 2022, Defendants noticed Plaintiff’s deposition for February 23, 2022.  However, two days prior to the deposition date, Plaintiff’s counsel requested to postpone the deposition, but Defendants moved forward with it, given that the deposition had been previously rescheduled.  Plaintiff did not appear for the deposition, and an affidavit of non-appearance was taken.  (Mot. Exh. I.) 

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, Defendants attest they contacted Plaintiff after the deposition date to meet and confer and inquire about Plaintiff’s non-appearance.  Any opposition to the motion was due by August 8, 2022.  To date, no opposition has been filed. 

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

As to the production of documents included in the deposition notice, Plaintiff does not set forth specific facts to establish good cause for the production of any documents.  (CCP § 2025.450(b)(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.”].)  Therefore, Defendants’ motion is denied as to the request for production of documents. 

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.  The court awards two hours for preparing the motion and one hour for appearing at the hearing all at the rate of $160.17 per hour, for a total attorney fees award of $480.51.  Further, Defendants are awarded the motion filing fee of $60 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 Defendants, by and through their attorney of record, in the total amount of $540.51, within twenty days. 

Defendants are ordered to give notice. 

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE:

• Parties are encouraged to meet and confer after reading this tentative ruling to see if they can reach an agreement.
• If a party intends to submit on this tentative ruling, the party must send an email to the court at sscdept31@lacourt.org with the Subject line “SUBMIT” followed by the case number.  The body of the email must include the hearing date and time, counsel’s contact information, and the identity of the party submitting.  
• Unless all parties submit by email to this tentative ruling, the parties should arrange to appear remotely (encouraged) or in person for oral argument.  You should assume that others may appear at the hearing to argue.  
• If the parties neither submit nor appear at hearing, the Court may take the motion off calendar or adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the Court.  After the Court has issued a tentative ruling, the Court may prohibit the withdrawal of the subject motion without leave. 

Dated this 19^th day of August 2022