Judge: Blaine K. Bowman, Case: 37-2023-00048005-CU-OE-CTL, Date: 2024-06-28 Tentative Ruling

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,

DEPT.:

EVENT DATE:

EVENT TIME:

HALL OF JUSTICE

TENTATIVE RULINGS - June 27, 2024

06/28/2024  08:30:00 AM  C-74 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

JUDICIAL OFFICER:Blaine K. Bowman

CASE NO.:

CASE CATEGORY:

EVENT TYPE:

CASE TITLE: CASE TYPE:

Civil - Unlimited  Other employment Discovery Hearing 37-2023-00048005-CU-OE-CTL MARCOS VS RSC MECHANICAL INC [IMAGED] CAUSAL DOCUMENT/DATE FILED:

Plaintiff's motion to compel answers at continued deposition of Thomas Walters is DENIED for failure to comply with the separate statement requirement of California Rules of Court, rule 3.1345 and failure to comply with the notice requirements of CCP § 1010 and CRC 3.1112(a).

Pursuant to CRC 3.1345: (a) Separate statement required Except as provided in (b), any motion involving the content of a discovery request or the responses to such a request must be accompanied by a separate statement. The motions that require a separate statement include a motion: . . . .

(4) To compel answers at a deposition; . . . .

(c) Contents of separate statement A separate statement is a separate document filed and served with the discovery motion that provides all the information necessary to understand each discovery request and all the responses to it that are at issue. The separate statement must be full and complete so that no person is required to review any other document in order to determine the full request and the full response. Material must not be incorporated into the separate statement by reference. The separate statement must include--for each discovery request (e.g., each interrogatory, request for admission, deposition question, or inspection demand) to which a further response, answer, or production is requested--the following: (1) The text of the request, interrogatory, question, or inspection demand; (2) The text of each response, answer, or objection, and any further responses or answers; (3) A statement of the factual and legal reasons for compelling further responses, answers, or production as to each matter in dispute; Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

3135623  9 CASE NUMBER: CASE TITLE:  MARCOS VS RSC MECHANICAL INC [IMAGED]  37-2023-00048005-CU-OE-CTL (4) If necessary, the text of all definitions, instructions, and other matters required to understand each discovery request and the responses to it; (5) If the response to a particular discovery request is dependent on the response given to another discovery request, or if the reasons a further response to a particular discovery request is deemed necessary are based on the response to some other discovery request, the other request and the response to it must be set forth; and . . . .

[Emphasis added.] The court is not persuaded by Plaintiff's argument that a separate statement is not required on a motion to compel answers at a deposition. The express language of CRC 3.1345, highlighted above, specifically includes motions '[t]o compel answers at deposition' in the list of motions requiring a separate statement and specifically requires that the separate statement include 'deposition questions.' The requirements of CRC 3.1345 are mandatory. Moreover, Plaintiff's failure to include the required separate statement places an undue burden on this court in ascertaining the precise deposition questions and answers at issue. In these circumstances, the court exercises its discretion in favor of denying Plaintiff's motion for failure to comply with CRC 3.1345. See, Mills v. U.S. Bank (2008) 166 Cal.App.4th 871, 893 [interpreting former rule 335(c) and rule 3.1020(c)].

Plaintiff's motion is also denied for failure to include a notice of motion as required by CCP § 1010 and CRC 3.1112(a). Although Plaintiff states in reply that Plaintiff subsequently filed a notice, there is no notice in the court file.

Plaintiff's request for sanctions is DENIED.

If this tentative ruling is confirmed the Minute Order will be the final order of the court and the parties shall not submit any further order on this motion.

Unless the ruling(s) above indicate that an appearance is necessary, parties who wish to submit, who are satisfied with the above tentative ruling(s), and/or who do not otherwise wish to argue the motion(s) are encouraged to give notice to the Court and each other of their intention not to appear.

Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

3135623  9