Judge Kerry Bensinger, Case 21STCV39851 2023-03-15 Tentative Ruling

On October 29, 2021, plaintiff Monica M. Williams (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Harold Winston Rogel (“Defendant”). Plaintiff alleges she was injured and damaged on January 13, 2021 when Defendant struck her vehicle from the back.

Defendant now moves to compel Plaintiff to provide deposition testimony within 15 days from the date of this hearing. Defendant also seeks an order imposing monetary sanctions against Plaintiff in the amount of $686.65. No opposition has been filed.

Any party may obtain discovery by taking in California the oral deposition of any person. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2025.010.) “If, after service of a deposition notice, a party to the action…without having served a valid objection under Section 2025.410, 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.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 2025.450, subd. (a).)

“If a motion under [Code of Civil Procedure section 2025.450] subdivision (a) is granted, the court shall impose a monetary sanction under Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 2023.010) in favor of the party who noticed the deposition and against the deponent or the party with whom the deponent is affiliated, unless the court finds that the one subject to the sanction acted with substantial justification or that other circumstances make the imposition of the sanction unjust.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 2025.450, subd. (g)(1).)

Plaintiff’s deposition was scheduled for and commenced on May 17, 2022. However, shortly into the deposition, Plaintiff disconnected from the virtually-held deposition. Because Plaintiff’s deposition was not completed, Defendant served notice of Plaintiff’s deposition for June 24, 2022. At the request of the Plaintiff’s former counsel, the deposition was continued to July 15, 2022, and later, to October 28, 2022.

Plaintiff’s former counsel was relieved as counsel of record on September 29, 2022.

On October 6, 2022, Defendant reminded Plaintiff of the pending deposition through mail and email correspondence. On October 10, 2022, Defendant provided Plaintiff with the virtual deposition link and instructions by email for the October 28, 2022 deposition. On October 26, 2022, counsel for Defendant called Plaintiff by telephone who confirmed having received the virtual deposition link and instructions. However, Plaintiff failed to appear for the deposition on October 28, 2022. (Michaelson Decl., ¶¶ 2-13.)

Defendant properly noticed Plaintiff’s deposition and Plaintiff failed to appear. Accordingly, Defendant’s motion to compel the Plaintiff’s deposition is GRANTED.

Defendant requests imposition of monetary sanctions against Plaintiff in the amount $686.65 to cover fees and costs. Defendant offers the declaration of counsel to justify the amount sought. (Michaelson Decl., ¶ 15.)

Pursuant to Section 2025.450, subdivision (g)(1), the Court is obligated to impose sanctions. The Court finds that Defendant’s counsel’s hourly rate of $200 is reasonable as is the fee of $225 for certificate of non-appearance, and $66.65 for filing fees.

The motion is granted. The Court orders Plaintiff Monica M. Williams to appear for deposition within fifteen (15) days of notice of this order.

The Court imposes $686.65 in monetary sanctions against Plaintiff Monica M. Williams. Sanctions are to be paid within thirty (30) days of notice of this order.

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at SSCDEPT27@lacourt.org indicating intention to submit on the tentative as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org. Please be advised that if you submit on the tentative and elect not to appear at the hearing, the opposing party may nevertheless appear at the hearing and argue the matter. Unless you receive a submission from all other parties in the matter, you should assume that others might appear at the hearing to argue. If the Court does not receive emails from the parties indicating submission on this tentative ruling and there are no appearances at the hearing, the Court may, at its discretion, adopt the tentative as the final order or place the motion off calendar.

Hon. Kerry Bensinger

Judge of the Superior Court