Judge: David A. Hoffer, Case: 30-2014-753368, Date: 2022-10-24 Tentative Ruling

The unopposed motion by plaintiff Valerie Romero to quash the subpoena issued to Topp & Lau, Inc. and for a protective order is GRANTED subject to the parties meeting and conferring and agreeing to the terms of an acceptable proposed protective order as set forth herein.

Plaintiff’s motion to quash and request for a protective order has merit.  Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1987.1, the court “may make an order quashing the subpoena entirely, modifying it, or directing compliance with it upon those terms or conditions as the court shall declare, including protective orders.”  A person has a right to privacy in his or her confidential financial affairs.  (Valley Bank of Nevada v. Superior Court (1975) 15 Cal.3d 652, 656.)  Tax records, both state and federal, are privileged.  (Webb v. Standard Oil Co. (1957) 49 Cal. 2d 509, 513-514.). 

Plaintiff asks the court to limit the production “to exclude all records covered under the taxpayer privilege. (31 CFR 10)” and to “issue a protective order limiting the discovery that seeks privileged matters, or is irrelevant or not likely to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence under Code of Civil Procedure section 2017.010.”    However, the plaintiff failed to submit a proposed order setting forth the actual documents she seeks to protect from disclosure.

Within 7 days the parties are to meet and confer and agree on an appropriate proposed protective order that identifies specific documents or categories of documents and is reasonably particularized from the standpoint of Top & Lau, Inc. and complies with Calcor Space Facility, Inc. v. Sup.Ct. (Thiem Indus., Inc.) (1997) 53 CA4th 216, 222.  The proposed order should not require Top & Lau, Inc. to make a determination as to what may be considered privileged, relevant or discoverable. 

Moving party is ordered to give notice of this ruling.