Judge: Gary I. Micon, Case: 24CHCV00733, Date: 2025-06-09 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24CHCV00733    Hearing Date: June 9, 2025    Dept: F43

Dept. F43

Date: 06-09-25

Case # 24CHCV00733, Cordova, et al. v. American Honda Motor Co.

Trial Date: 08-10-26

MOTION TO COMPEL VEHICLE INSPECTION

MOVING PARTY: Defendant American Honda Motor Co., Inc.

RESPONDING PARTY: No response has been filed.

RELIEF REQUESTED

Order compelling plaintiffs to present their 2022 Honda Civic for inspection and awarding $1,082.00 in monetary sanctions.

RULING: Motion is granted.  The court awards Defendant $872 in monetary sanctions.

SUMMARY OF ACTION

Plaintiffs Manuel Cordova and Jose Ramirez (Plaintiffs) filed this lemon law case against defendant American Honda Motor Co., Inc. (Defendant) on March 6, 2024, alleging breach of express warranty and breach of implied warranty causes of action.

On April 30, 2024, Defendant served Plaintiffs with a notice of vehicle inspection for Plaintiffs’ Honda Civic scheduled for September 19, 2024.  (Declaration of Ila B. Zielke, ¶ 3, Exh. 1.)  The parties unilaterally vacated this date.  (Zielke Dec., ¶ 4.)  On November 17, 2024, defense counsel emailed Plaintiffs’ counsel requesting available dates for a vehicle inspection, suggesting April 24 and 25, 2025, but Plaintiffs’ counsel did not respond.  (Zielke Dec., ¶ 5, Exh. 2.)

On February 5, 2025, defense counsel again emailed Plaintiffs’ counsel requesting alternative dates for the vehicle inspection.  (Zielke Dec., ¶ 6, Exh. 3.)  That same day, Plaintiffs’ counsel responded stating they would look for available dates.  (Zielke Dec., ¶ 6, Exh. 3.)  Plaintiffs’ counsel never provided an update.  (Zielke Dec., ¶ 6, Exh. 3.)  On February 20, 2025, defense counsel sent a follow-up email for inspection dates.  (Zielke Dec., ¶ 7, Exh. 4.)  Plaintiffs’ counsel responded stating they were looking for dates in May and June 2025 but that plaintiff’s deployment dates were uncertain and that Plaintiffs are open to settlement.  (Zielke Dec., ¶ 7, Exh. 4.)  

Plaintiffs’ counsel has yet to provide alternative dates.  (Zielke Dec., ¶ 8.)

On March 5, 2025, Defendant filed a motion to compel the vehicle inspection of Plaintiffs’ 2022 Honda Civic.  No opposition has been filed.

MEET AND CONFER

A demanding party must attach a meet and confer declaration to its motion to compel discovery.  (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2031.310, subd. (b)(2), 2016.040.)  The declaration must “state facts showing a reasonable and good faith attempt at an informal resolution of each issue presented by the motion.”  (Code Civ. Proc., § 2016.040.)  “The level of effort at informal resolution which satisfies the ‘reasonable and good faith attempt’ standard depends upon the circumstances.”  (Obregon v. Superior Court (1998) 67 Cal.App.4th 424, 431.)  In Department F43, meet and confer means in person or via phone.  A letter or email does not suffice.  (Department F43 Courtroom Information, p. 2.)

The supporting declaration does not indicate that the parties met and conferred according to the court’s Song-Beverly Litigation Discovery Order.  Defendant claims it has exhausted meet and confer efforts, but the declaration does not state that defense counsel initiated any phone calls or in person meetings to discuss the vehicle inspection.

ANALYSIS

A party may inspect land or other property in possession, custody, or control of any other party to the action.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.010, subd. (a).)  A party may move to compel further responses to an inspection demand if the party believes the initial responses contain (1) an incomplete statement of compliance; (2) an inadequate, incomplete, or evasive representation of inability to comply; or (3) an objection that is too general or lacks merit.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.310, subd. (a).)

Although the parties have not met and conferred in person, the court grants Defendant’s motion.  Defendant properly and timely served its inspection notice on Plaintiffs.  However, Plaintiffs failed to provide alternative dates and do not oppose Defendant’s motion.

Therefore, the court grants Defendant American Honda Motor’s motion to compel Plaintiffs to present their 2022 Honda Civic for a vehicle inspection.

            Sanctions

The court must impose monetary sanctions against any party, person, or attorney who unsuccessfully makes or opposes a motion to compel compliance with an inspection demand, unless the court finds that the one subject to the sanctions acted with substantial justification or that other circumstances make the imposition of the sanction unjust.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.320, subd. (b).)¿ 

Defendant seeks $1,082.00 in sanctions.  (Declaration of Ila B. Zielke, ¶ 10.)  The requested sanctions include the following: (1) 1.2 hours for attorney Zielke to draft the motion at $210 per hour—$252; (2) 1.0 hour for partner and attorney Austin Henderson to revise the motion and supporting declaration at $350 per hour—$350; (3) 2.0 hours anticipated to review an opposition, prepare a reply, and attend the hearing—$420; and (4) a $60.00 filing fee.  (Ibid.) 

The court finds the hourly rates reasonable but reduces the time anticipated for the opposition, reply, and attending the hearing to 1.0 hour.

Therefore, the court grants Defendant’s request for sanctions in the reduced amount of $872: (1) 1.2 hours for attorney Zielke to draft the motion at $210 per hour—$252; (2) 1.0 hour for partner and attorney Austin Henderson to revise the motion and supporting declaration at $350 per hour—$350; (3) 1.0 hour anticipated to attend the motion hearing—$210; and (4) a $60.00 filing fee.

CONCLUSION and ORDER

Defendant American Honda Motor’s motion to compel Plaintiffs to present their 2022 Honda Civic for inspection is granted.

The court awards Defendant sanctions in the reduced amount of $872.00.

1.  Plaintiffs are ordered to present their 2202 Honda Civic for inspection within 30 days of the date of this order.

2.  Plaintiffs and their counsel of record are ordered to pay Defendant $872.00 in monetary sanctions within 30 days of this order.  Plaintiffs and their counsel are ordered to pay these sanctions to Defendant’s counsel within 20 days of the date of this order.

Defendant American Honda Motor Company, Inc. to give notice.