Judge: Donald F. Gaffney, Case: Vasquez Reyes v. General Motors LLC, Date: 2022-12-07 Tentative Ruling

TENTATIVE RULING:

Motion to Compel Deposition

Plaintiffs Carolos Vasquez Reyes and Guadalupe Rodriguez Vasquez aka Guadalupe R Vasquez move to compel Defendant General Motors LLC to produce a Person(s) Most Qualified and Custodian of Records to be deposed. For the following reasons, Plaintiffs’ motion is DENIED without prejudice.

Any party may obtain discovery by taking in California the oral deposition of any person, including any party to the action. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2025.010.) The service of a deposition notice is effective to require any deponent who is a party to the action to attend and to testify, as well as to produce any document, electronically stored information, or tangible thing for inspection and copying. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2025.280(a).) If, after service of a deposition notice, a party to the action, without having served a valid objection under section 2025.410, fails to appear for examination 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. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2025.450(a).) The motion shall be accompanied by a meet and confer declaration under Code of Civil Procedure section 2016.040. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2025.450(b)(2).)

“ ‘The Discovery Act requires that, prior to the initiation of a motion to compel, the moving party declare that he or she has made a serious attempt to obtain “an informal resolution of each issue.” [Citations.] ... ” [Citation.]’ ” (Clement v. Alegre (2009) 177 Cal.App.4th 1277, 1293.) “ ‘[T]he statute requires that there be a serious effort at negotiation and informal resolution.’ [Citation.] ... ‘[A]rgument is not the same as informal negotiation’ [citation]; ... attempting informal resolution means more than the mere attempt by the discovery proponent ‘to persuade the objector of the error of his ways’ [citation]; and ... ‘[a] reasonable and good faith attempt at informal resolution entails something more than bickering with [opposing] counsel .... Rather, the law requires that counsel attempt to talk the matter over, compare their views, consult, and deliberate’ [citation].” (Id. at 1294.)

Neither the moving papers nor the opposition papers contains any evidence the parties conducted a sufficient and good faith meet and confer effort regarding the 16 categories of examination at issue before Plaintiffs filed this motion. The parties did not attempt to informally resolve the substantive issues raised in Defendant’s August 3, 2022, Response to Plaintiffs’ Notice of Deposition. In any future meet and confer discussions, counsel shall make good faith efforts to resolve any disputes by comparing their views, consulting, and deliberating.  It is the Court’s expectation that counsel on both sides will offer solutions to the disputes, not just waste time trying to explain why the other side is wrong. Following these discussions, if any issues remain outstanding for court intervention, Plaintiffs may file another motion setting forth the category for examination(s) at issue, and including a detailed description of the proposals the parties made to resolve the dispute before Plaintiffs filed the renewed motion.

Plaintiffs to give notice.