Judge: Audra Mori, Case: BC721961, Date: 2022-10-03 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: BC721961    Hearing Date: October 3, 2022    Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

1. Background

Plaintiff Saydheli Santibanez (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against defendants McDonald’s Corporation and Sanchez Family Corporation for injuries Plaintiff sustained while at the drive-thru of a restaurant.  While Plaintiff was sitting in her car, an employee allegedly dropped a cup of hot coffee on Plaintiff, and Plaintiff sustained burn injuries as a result. 

Defendant Sanchez Family Corporation (“Defendant”), at this time, moves to compel non-parties Arturo Millan aka Arturo Millan Monterrosas (“Millan”) and Donyina Appauh, P.A. (“Appauh”) to attend their respective depositions.  Defendant has filed proof of personal service of the motions on Millan and Appauh.  The motions are unopposed.

2. Motions to Compel Compliance with Deposition Subpoenas

The service of a deposition notice, pursuant to CCP § 2025.240, is effective to require any party deponent to attend, testify, and produce materials for inspection at a deposition.  (CCP § 2025.280(a).)  To require the attendance and testimony of a non-party deponent, as well as his or her production of any document or tangible thing for inspection and copying, the party seeking discovery must serve on that deponent a deposition subpoena, pursuant CCP § 2020.010, et seq.  (CCP §§ 2020.010(b), 2025.280(b); See also Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh (2005) 131 Cal.App.4th 1342, 1350 [discovery from nonparties is governed by CCP §§ 2020.010, et seq., and is primarily carried out by way of subpoena].) 

If a deponent fails to answer any question or to produce any document, the party seeking discovery may move the court for an order compelling that answer or production.  (CCP § 2025.480(a).)  If the court determines that the answer or production sought is subject to discovery, it shall order that the answer be given or the production be made on the resumption of the deposition.  (CCP § 2025.480(i).) 

                        a. Millan

Defendant asserts that Millan is Plaintiff’s partner and had a close relationship with Plaintiff both prior to and following the incident.  Defendant contends that Millan has knowledge of Plaintiff’s ongoing complaints and injuries, including of her claims of pain and discomfort regarding her injuries.  On February 23, 2022, Defendant personally served a deposition subpoena on Millan requiring him to appear for his deposition on March 23, 2022.  Defendant attests that Millan did not appear and a certificate of non-appearance was taken.  There has been no objection filed to the subpoena, nor has a motion to quash been filed. 

The unopposed motion to compel Millan to comply with the deposition subpoena is granted.  Millan 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).   

No sanctions are requested, and none are awarded.

b. Appauh

Defendant asserts that Appauh was the physician that examined and evaluated Plaintiff’s alleged burn injuries on the date of the incident.  Defendant contends that Appauh has direct knowledge of the nature and extent of Plaintiff’s burn injuries, and as to how the injuries were sustained.  Defendant avers that on March 12, 2022, Defendant personally served a deposition subpoena on Appauh requiring Appauh’s appearance for deposition on March 23, 2022.  Defendant, however, provides that Appauh failed to appear and a certificate of non-appearance was taken.  There has been no objection filed to the deposition subpoena, nor has a motion to quash or opposition to this motion been filed.

The unopposed motion to compel Appauh to comply with the deposition subpoena is granted.  Appauh 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).   

            No sanctions are requested, and none are awarded.

Defendant is 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 3^rd day of October 2022