Judge: Joseph Lipner, Case: 22STCV35844, Date: 2023-09-07 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 22STCV35844 Hearing Date: April 9, 2024 Dept: 72
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
DEPARTMENT 72
TENTATIVE RULING
|
CARLOS DERPIC, Plaintiff, v. GENERAL MOTORS LLC, Defendants. |
Case No: 22stcv35844 Hearing Date: April 9,2024 Calendar
Number: 3 |
Plaintiff Carlos
Drepic (“Plaintiff”) seeks to compel the deposition of a Person Most Qualified
(“PMQ”) on all categories pursuant to a notice propounded to Defendant General
Motors LLC (“Defendant”).
The Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s motion in part as follows. Defendant shall within 30 days produce a PMQ
for deposition on categories 1-4, 7 and 10 of the deposition notice. Except as so granted, the Court denies the
motion. Plaintiff shall give notice
Defendant agrees that the topics enumerated above are
proper. As to all other categories,
Plaintiff has failed to file a separate statement in support of the
motion. Nor has Plaintiff filed any
document explaining category-by-category why the other categories are
supposedly proper notwithstanding Defendant’s objections. The Court therefore does not compel the
production of a PMQ as to any of the other topics.
Plaintiff argues in his reply that no separate statement is
required. The Court disagrees. CRC 3.1345 subdivision (a) requires a
separate statement for “[a]ny motion involving the content of a discovery
request.” This is such a motion. Parties routinely file separate statements
where a defendant objects to entire categories of PMQ deposition notices. Moreover, Plaintiff’s failure to at least
address the objections raised by Defendant on a category-by-category deprives
the Court of an ability to rule on the substance of the other categories.