Judge: Cherol J. Nellon, Case: 18STCV09870, Date: 2023-03-21 Tentative Ruling

All parties are urged to meet and confer with all parties concerning this tentative ruling to see if they can reach an agreed-upon resolution of their matter.  If you are able to reach an agreement, please notify the courtroom staff in advance of the hearing if you wish to submit on the tentative ruling rather than argue the motion by notifying the court by e-mailing the court at: SSCDEPT28@lacourt.org.  Include the word "SUBMITS" in all caps and the Case Number in the Subject line.  In the body of the email, please provide the date and time of the hearing, your name, your contact information, the party you represent, and whether that party is a plaintiff, defendant, cross-complainant, cross-defendant, claimant, intervenor, or non-party, etc.

            Please be advised that if you submit on the tentative and elect not to appear at the hearing, the opposing party may still appear at the hearing and argue the matter, and the court could change its tentative based upon the argument.  Unless you receive a submission from all other parties in the matter, you should assume that others might appear at the hearing to argue.  If you submit, but still intend to appear, include the words "SUBMITS, BUT WILL APPEAR" in the Subject line.     If you elect to argue your matter, you are urged to do so remotely, via Court-Connect.
                          
            Note that once the Court has issued a tentative, the Court has the inherent authority not to allow the withdrawal of a motion and to adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the court.   
 
            If you submitted a courtesy copy of your papers containing media (such as a DVD or thumb drive), unless you request the return of the media in your papers, the court will destroy it following the hearing of your matter.  

Case Number: 18STCV09870    Hearing Date: March 21, 2023    Dept: 28

Defendant Marcelle Do Valle’s Motion to Compel Plaintiff Tira Wallace’s Further Deposition

Having considered the moving, opposing and reply papers, the Court rules as follows.

BACKGROUND

On December 28, 2018, Plaintiff Tira Wallace (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Defendants Marcelle Do Valle (“Valle”), EAN Holdings, LLC (“EAN LLC”), Enterprise Holdings (“Enterprise”), EAN Holdings Enterprise Rent Car (“EAN RC”) and Enterprise Rent a Car (“RAC”) for motor vehicle negligence. Plaintiff later amended the complaint to include Defendant Enterprise Rent-A-Car Company of Los Angeles, LLC (“RAC LA”).

On May 29, 2019, Plaintiff filed the FAC. Plaintiff later amended the complaint to include Defendant Carlos Lira (“Lira”).

On June 14, 2019, EAN LLC filed an answer. On July 23, 2020, Valle filed an answer. On August 21, 2020, the Court dismissed Enterprise, EAN RC, RAC LA and RAC without prejudice, pursuant to Plaintiff’s request. On October 14, 2020, the Court dismissed EAN LLC, without prejudice, pursuant to Plaintiff’s request. On January 26, 2022, the Court dismissed Lira, without prejudice.

On February 3, 2023, Valle filed a Motion to Compel Plaintiff’s Further Deposition to be heard on March 21, 2023. On February 24, 2023, Plaintiff filed an opposition. On March 14, 2023, Valle filed a reply.

Trial is currently scheduled for February 6, 2023

PARTY’S REQUESTS

Valle requests the Court compel Plaintiff to appear for a second deposition.

Plaintiff requests the Court deny the motion.

LEGAL STANDARD

Code of Civil Procedure § 2025.610 provides that leave to take subsequent depositions may be granted by the Court upon a showing of good cause. 

DISCUSSION

Plaintiff’s first deposition was taken on April 29, 2021; the initial deposition only lasted 3 hours. At the deposition, Plaintiff testified she had not received treatment for her injuries in nearly 3 years and had no plans for future treatment at the time. Plaintiff’s counsel recently informed Valle’s counsel that Plaintiff intended to obtain further treatment, including a spinal cord stimulator. This treatment was used as a basis to continue the trial date, as it is a “significant change in the circumstances of this case,” and parties needed additional time to “fully investigate Plaintiff’s injuries[.]”

Plaintiff argues that there is not good cause, as Plaintiff telegraphed potential future treatment during her deposition. Plaintiff testified that although the 2017 surgery was helpful, she still had some pain she was living with. She also testified that doctors stated that she may need future surgery “later on down the road, maybe.”

The Court finds good cause; Plaintiff previously testified she had no immediate plans to receive future treatment, and that future treatment would only “maybe” occur. There was no explanation for what this treatment might be, what it might treat or any other relevant factors that would be necessary for Valle to investigate the treatment. Situations have changed so drastically that parties needed to request a continuance to accommodate Plaintiff’s upcoming treatment and investigate this treatment. Given that Plaintiff's injuries and this treatment will both be at issue at trial, the Court finds good cause to allow a subsequent deposition focused on this treatment.

CONCLUSION

Defendant Marcelle Do Valle’s Motion to Compel Plaintiff Tira Wallace’s Further Deposition is GRANTED. Plaintiff is ordered to appear for her deposition within 10 days of the hearing on this motion.

Moving party is ordered to give notice of this ruling.

Moving Party is ordered to file the proof of service of this ruling with the Court within five days.