Judge: Kerry Bensinger, Case: 22STCV01540, Date: 2023-03-30 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV01540    Hearing Date: March 30, 2023    Dept: 27

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

I.            BACKGROUND

On January 13, 2022, plaintiffs Jenny Iturrios (“Iturrious”) and Mayra Perez (“Perez”) (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) filed this action against defendants EAN Holdings, LLC, Sabrina Nicole Hicks, Rashida Isoke Lenard (“Lenard”), and Darlene Moka (“Moka”).  Plaintiffs assert causes of action for negligence, negligence per se, and negligent entrustment arising from a multi-vehicle collision that occurred on or around June 28, 2020.

Defendants Lenard and Moka (hereinafter, “Defendants”) now move to compel Plaintiffs to appear for and testify at deposition in this matter.  Defendants also request sanctions.  

The motions are unopposed. 

II.          LEGAL STANDARD      

A.   Compel Deposition

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).) 

B.   Monetary Sanctions

“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).)  

III.     ANALYSIS

A.   Compel Deposition

Defendants served notices of taking Plaintiffs’ deposition on three occasions.  The parties eventually agreed to set depositions for January 24, 2023.  On January 20, 2023, Plaintiffs’ counsel confirmed the deposition of Plaintiff Iturrios for the agreed upon date and time.  However, Plaintiff Iturrios did not appear on January 24, 2023.  Plaintiffs’ counsel then went on the record to state that Plaintiff Perez was not available and he had not been able to reach her.  To date, Plaintiffs have not appeared for deposition.  (Fakih Decls., ¶¶ 4-14.)

Defendants properly noticed Plaintiffs’ deposition and Plaintiffs failed to appear.  Accordingly, Defendants’ motions to compel Plaintiff Jenny Iturrios’s and Plaintiff Mayra Perez’s depositions are GRANTED.

B.   Monetary Sanctions

Pursuant to Section 2025.450, subdivision (g)(1), the Court is obligated to impose sanctions.  Defendants request imposition of monetary sanctions against each Plaintiff in the amount $461.65.  Defendants offer the declaration of counsel to justify the monetary sanctions sought.  (Fakih Decls., ¶ 15.)  The Court finds Defendants’ counsel’s hourly rate of $200 to be reasonable as is the request for $61.65 for filing fees.

IV.     CONCLUSION

          Defendants Rashida Isoki Lenard’s and Darlene Moka’s motions are granted.  The Court orders Plaintiff Jenny Iturrios and Plaintiff Mayra Perez to appear for deposition within twenty (20) days of notice of this order.

The Court imposes $461.65 in sanctions against Plaintiff Jenny Iturrios and $461.65 in sanctions against Plaintiff Mayra Perez.  Sanctions are to be paid within thirty (30) days of notice of this order.

Moving party to give notice.

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.

          Dated this 30th day of March 2023