Judge: Holly J. Fujie, Case: 22STCV09783, Date: 2022-11-14 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV09783    Hearing Date: November 14, 2022    Dept: 56

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff

RESPONDING PARTY: Defendant Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC (“Defendant”)

The Court has considered the moving and opposition papers.  No reply papers were filed.  Any reply papers were required to have been filed and served at least five court days before the hearing under California Code of Civil Procedure section 1005, subdivision (b).

BACKGROUND

            This action arises out of the lease of an allegedly defective car leased by Plaintiff.  Plaintiff’s complaint (the “Complaint”) alleges: (1) violations of various provisions of the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act.

On August 2, 2022, Plaintiff filed a motion to compel the deposition of Defendant’s person most knowledgeable (“PMK”) and production of documents (the “Motion”).

DISCUSSION

            Under CCP section 2025.450, if, after service of a deposition notice, a party to the action or an officer, director, managing agent, or employee of a party, or a person designated by an organization that is a party, without having served a valid objection, fails to appear for examination, or to proceed with it, 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.  (CCP § 2025.450, subd. (a).)  The motion must both: (1) set forth specific facts showing good cause justifying the production for inspection of any document, electronically stored information, or tangible thing described in the deposition notice; and (2) include a meet and confer declaration pursuant to CCP 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, subd. (b)(1)-(2); see Leko v. Cornerstone Building Inspection Service (2001) 86 Cal.App.4th 1109, 1124 (the statute also applies when the deponent simply fails to appear).)

            Plaintiff noticed the deposition of Defendant’s PMK on April 22, 2022.  (Declaration of Ray Naderi (“Naderi Decl.”) ¶ 2, Exhibit A.)  On May 16, 2022, Defendant objected to the deposition notice and indicated that it would work with Plaintiff to coordinate an alternate time for the deposition to occur.  (Naderi Decl. ¶ 3, Exhibit B.)  Despite several attempts to have Defendant provide a suitable deposition date, no new deposition date had been selected at the time Plaintiff filed the Motion.  (See Naderi Decl. ¶¶ 4-6.)

            Defendant provides evidence that as of October 10, 2022, the parties agreed to have the deposition go forward on January 26, 2023.  (See Declaration of Phil J. Montoya, Jr. (“Montoya Decl.”) ¶¶ 6-7.)  Plaintiff served the amended notice of deposition on October 22, 2022.  (Montoya Decl. ¶ 7.) 

            As the deposition of Defendant’s PMK has been rescheduled and re-noticed, the Court finds that the Motion is MOOT.  Plaintiff’s request for monetary sanctions is DENIED. 

Moving party is ordered to give notice of this ruling.

In consideration of the current COVID-19 pandemic situation, the Court strongly encourages that appearances on all proceedings, including this one, be made by LACourtConnect if the parties do not submit on the tentative.  If you instead intend to make an appearance in person at Court on this matter, you must send an email by 2 p.m. on the last Court day before the scheduled date of the hearing to SMC_DEPT56@lacourt.org stating your intention to appear in person.  The Court will then inform you by close of business that day of the time your hearing will be held. The time set for the hearing may be at any time during that scheduled hearing day, or it may be necessary to schedule the hearing for another date if the Court is unable to accommodate all personal appearances set on that date.  This rule is necessary to ensure that adequate precautions can be taken for proper social distancing.

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at SMC_DEPT56@lacourt.org as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org.  If the department does not receive an email and there are no appearances at the hearing, the motion will be placed off calendar.

         Dated this 14th day of November 2022