Judge Gary Y. Tanaka, Case 22TRCV00314 2023-04-12 Tentative Ruling

LOS ANGELES SUPERIOR COURT – SOUTHWEST DISTRICT

Honorable Gary Y. Tanaka Wednesday, April 12, 2023

Department B Calendar No. 3

Del Amo Fashion Center Operating Company, LLC v. Slater Torrance, LLC, et al.

1. Del Amo Fashion Center Operating Company, LLC’s Motion for an Order Compelling Defendant, Slater Torrance, LLC’s Person Most Knowledgeable, Bob Yari, Alex Yari, and Sarah Bennett to Appear for Their Depositions and Request for Monetary Sanctions

Del Amo Fashion Center Operating Company, LLC’s Motion for an Order Compelling Defendant, Slater Torrance, LLC’s Person Most Knowledgeable, Bob Yari, Alex Yari, and Sarah Bennett to Appear for Their Depositions and Request for Monetary Sanctions is granted.

Plaintiff filed the Complaint on April 28, 2022. Plaintiff alleges a sole cause of action for Unlawful Detainer. Plaintiff alleges the following facts. Plaintiff was, and is, the owner of those certain premises commonly known as Del Amo Fashion Center, 3525 Carson Street, Room 75, Torrance, California 90503. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant breached the lease agreement.

Plaintiff set forth a meet and confer declaration in compliance with CCP § 2025.450(b)(2). (Decl., Jonathan J. Herzog, ¶¶ 8-18.)

The party noticing the deposition may move for an order compelling appearance at the deposition and production of documents, pursuant to the deposition notice, from the party deponent who fails to appear or produce materials requested in the deposition notice, and who has not served a valid objection under § 2025.410(a). CCP § 2025.450(a).

“The motion shall be accompanied by a meet and confer declaration under Section 2016.040, or, when the deponent fails to attend the deposition and produce the documents, electronically stored information, or things described in the deposition notice, by a declaration stating that the petitioner has contacted the deponent to inquire about the nonappearance.” CCP § 2025.450(b)(2).

Plaintiff moves for an order compelling Defendant, Slater Torrance, LLC’s Person Most Knowledgeable, Bob Yari, Alex Yari, and Sarah Bennett to appear for their depositions via zoom. The motion is made on the ground that deponents have refused to appear for their depositions. Plaintiff states that it has attempted to proceed with the deposition on numerous dates after the initial noticed date, but has been thwarted each time with Defendant contending that the deponents are not available. (Decl., Herzog, ¶¶ 8-18.) Plaintiff also seeks sanctions against Defendant and its counsel of record.

Defendant failed to file any written opposition to the motion and has not demonstrated the existence of a valid objection to the deposition notice. It does appear that the parties should have been able to obtain a date amenable to both parties for the depositions. However, since the depositions have not yet taken place and there is no dispute that Defendant’s PMK did not appear for the properly noticed depositions, Plaintiff’s motion to compel deposition is granted.

Defendant, Slater Torrance, LLC’s Person Most Knowledgeable, Bob Yari, Alex Yari, and Sarah Bennett are ordered to appear for their deposition via zoom at a reasonable date and time to be determined by the moving party.

Plaintiff’s request for monetary sanctions is granted. Sanctions are awarded in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendant and Defendant’s counsel in the total amount of $1,074.00. The hourly rate and time expended as set forth in the declaration of Jonathan Herzog is reasonable. Sanctions are payable within 30 days of this date.