Judge: Lee S. Arian, Case: 20STCV49058, Date: 2023-11-01 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 20STCV49058    Hearing Date: November 1, 2023    Dept: 27

Tentative Ruling

Judge Lee S Arian, Department 27

HEARING DATE:      November 1, 2023                                       TRIAL DATE:  March 22, 2024

CASE:                                Bertha Lidia Rapalo Rivera v. Oscar Misael Viera, et al.

CASE NO.:                 20STCV49058

MOTION TO COMPEL PLAINTIFF’S DEPOSITION

MOVING PARTY:               Defendants Oscar Misael Vira dba OMD Trucking, et al.

RESPONDING PARTY:     No opposition

I.          BACKGROUND

            This action arises from a three-vehicle collision allegedly caused by Victor Hugo Cardona (“Cardona”) and involving Bertha Lidia Rapalo Rivera (“Rivera”) and Jesus Soto (“Soto”).¿ On May 1, 2019, Cardona was driving a semi-truck purportedly owned by Oscar Misael Viera dba OMD Trucking (“Viera”).¿ All parties were traveling on the freeway.  Soto was in the far left lane and Rivera was in the lane to Soto’s right.  Cardona allegedly made an unsafe lane change, forcing Rivera to veer left into Soto’s lane and collide with Soto.  Rivera and Soto each filed separate actions (Case Nos. 20STCV49058 and 21STCV12703).  The cases were consolidated on September 25, 2023.

            On July 28, 2023, Defendants Viera and Cardona filed this motion to compel Plaintiff’s deposition.  Defendants do not seek sanctions.

            The motion is unopposed.[1] 

II.        LEGAL STANDARD TO 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).)¿¿¿ 

III.      DISCUSSION

Defendants noticed Plaintiff’s deposition on two occasions.  The first date was for February 21, 2023.  The second date was for July 17, 2023.  (See Motion, Exs. A and B.) However, Plaintiff did not appear for deposition at either date.  (See Declaration of Mark E. Capell.) 

Defendants properly noticed Plaintiff’s deposition and Plaintiff did not appear.  Accordingly, Defendants are entitled to an order compelling Plaintiff’s appearance at deposition.¿ 

IV.       CONCLUSION 

The motion is granted.  Plaintiff Bertha Lidia Rapalo Rivera is ordered to appear for deposition within 30 days of this order.

Moving party to give notice. 

Dated:   November 1, 2023                                      ___________________________________

                                                                                    Lee S. Arian

                                                                                    Judge of the Superior Court

            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.