Judge: John J. Kralik, Case: 25STCV02510, Date: 2025-06-06 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 25STCV02510 Hearing Date: June 6, 2025 Dept: NCB
North
Central District
|
first united
methodist church of san gabriel, california, Plaintiff, v. yuko ogami, et seq. Defendants. |
Case No.: 25STCV02510 Hearing Date: June 6, 2025 [TENTATIVE]
order RE: motion to compel the deposition of defendant raijin construction,
inc. AND FOR SANCTIONS |
BACKGROUND
A.
Allegations of Complaint
Plaintiff First United Methodist Church of
San Gabriel, California (“Plaintiff”) alleges that this case involves
transnational fraud, embezzlement, and theft.
It alleges that Defendant Yuko Ogami (“Ogami”) was, for many years, the
deputy director of Kodomo No Ie (the “School”), an incorporated Japanese-language
children’s school operated by Plaintiff as one of its ministries. Plaintiff alleges that Ogami transferred
several million dollars of the School’s funds to herself, her family trust, a
new “academy” purportedly formed by her, and numerous third parties from October
28, 2019 to May 17, 2024.
The first amended complaint (“FAC”), filed
April 10, 2025, alleges causes of action for: (1) conversion; (2) breach of the
employee’s duty of loyalty; (3) breach of fiduciary duty; (4) violation of the
Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations Act (18 U.S.C. § 1961, et seq.);
(5) declaratory relief under CCP § 1060; (6) unjust enrichment; (7)
constructive trust; and (8) accounting.
B.
Motion on Calendar
On May 8, 2025, Plaintiff filed a motion
to compel the deposition of Defendant Raijin Construction Inc. (“RCI”) and for
sanctions.
On May 23, 2025, Defendant RCI filed
an opposition brief.
On May 30, 2025, Plaintiff filed a
reply brief.
DISCUSSION
Plaintiff moves to compel Defendant
RCI to comply with the deposition subpoena served on April 8, 2025 by producing
the requested documents. Plaintiff seeks
sanctions in the amount of $8,600.
On March 17, 2025 and April 8, 2025,
Plaintiff served a deposition subpoena and amended subpoena on RCI. (Lula Decl., Exs. C, E.) On April 23, 2025, RCI objected to the
amended subpoena. (Id., Ex.
I.)
In opposition, RCI argues that the
motion is moot because the parties agreed to a deposition date of June 24, 2025
through the Notice of Rescheduled Deposition of Raijin Construction, Inc. (Opp. at Ex. 1.) This notice relies on the April 8, 2025
amended subpoena but with a new date. (Id.) RCI argues that it has never refused to
appear for deposition, but instead timely served objections and provided dates
of availability for deposition. RCI
argues that to the extent Plaintiff seeks further responses to the document
demands, Plaintiff improperly moves under CCP § 2025.450 (where no objections
were served) and it has not moved under CCP § 2025.480 nor has filed a separate
statement seeking further responses to the document demand.
As the parties have agreed to a
deposition date for RCI after the filing of the motion, the motion with respect
to compelling RCI’s attendance at its deposition is moot. However, to ensure that the deposition goes
forward, the Court grants the motion to the extent that the parties are ordered
to conduct the deposition on June 24, 2025.
With
respect to the objections to the document demands, Plaintiff seeks further
response to document demand nos. 1-7:
·
1. RCI’s relationship, dealings, and
communications with Ogami.
·
2. RCI’s receipt of funds from the School,
including but not limited to checks numbered 1943, 1951, 1963, 1990, 1991, and
2056 drawn on Bank of America account number ending 7347.
·
3. The allegations in the complaint filed
in this action.
·
4. The facts supporting its contention
that it is a “victim of Ms. Ogami” as its attorney claimed on March 13, 2025.
·
5. The facts supporting its contention
that it is a “bona fide purchaser” as its attorney claimed on March 13, 2025.
·
6. The basis for the legal action it
intends to bring against Ogami, as its attorney stated on March 13, 2025.
·
7. Any insurance policies held by
RCI.
(Mot.,
Ex. E.) As raised by RCI, RCI timely
objected to the document demands. In
addition, no separate statement accompanies the motion papers. In reply, Plaintiff argues that no separate
statement is required where no response was made. However, RCI objected to the amended subpoena
on April 23, 2025, such that the Court will allow those objections to
stand. (RCI does not address the
substantive merits of the motion regarding the document demands.)
Even if the Court were to briefly
consider the merits of the motion regarding the document demands, the Court
would notes that the parties should meet and confer to impose some limitations
on these demands, which are to some extent overbroad. For example, Request no.
1 needs limitation as to time and subject matter. Request no. 2 also needs
limitations as to time and subject matter. With respect to nos. 3-6, Plaintiff
could again be seeking any type of document without regard for limitation of
time or privilege. With respect to no.
7, Plaintiff has not specified what type of insurance policies are sought.
Plaintiff seeks $8,600 in sanctions
against RCI. The request for sanctions
is denied. This motion could have been
avoided with better and more courteous meet and confer communications between
the parties. If discovery issues persist
between the parties, the Court would be inclined to award sanctions on future
motions.
CONCLUSION AND
ORDER
Plaintiff First United Methodist Church of
San Gabriel, California’s motion to compel Defendant Raijin Construction Inc.
deposition is granted to the extent that the parties are ordered to conduct the
deposition on June 24, 2025, which is the parties’ mutually agreed upon
deposition date. Plaintiff’s request for
production of documents accompanying the deposition notice is denied.
No sanctions will be awarded on this motion.
Plaintiff shall provide notice of this
order.
DATED: June 6, 2025 ___________________________
John
J. Kralik
Judge
of the Superior Court