Judge Lee S. Arian, Case Number: 22STCV11103, Date: 2024-06-12 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Lee S. Arian, Case: 22STCV11103, Date: 2024-06-12 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV11103 Hearing Date: June 12, 2024 Dept: 27

Hon. Lee S. Arian, Dept 27

MOTION TO COMPEL COMPLIANCE WITH DEPOSITION SUBPOENA AND REQUESTS FOR SANCTIONS

Hearing Date: 6/12/24¿

CASE NO./NAME: 22STCV11103 CRISTINA VACA vs COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION

Moving Party: Defendant Costco

Responding Party: Unopposed

Notice: Insufficient

Ruling: MOTION TO COMPEL COMPLIANCE WITH DEPOSITION SUBPOENA AND REQUESTS FOR SANCTIONS ARE DENIED.

Legal Standard

CCP § 2020.010 permits discovery of non-party witnesses through oral and written depositions. (See CCP § 2020.010(a)(1), (2); Hawkins v. TACA International Airlines, S.A. (2014) 223 Cal.App.4th 466, 476.) A deposition subpoena may command the attendance and testimony of the deponent, the production of business records, or both. (CCP § 2020.020.) Additional requirements regarding notification and a right to object are in place where the records sought are consumer records, including personal medical records. (See CCP § 1985.3.)

CCP § 2025.480(a) similarly provides that “[i]f a deponent fails to answer any question or to produce any document, electronically stored information,¿or tangible thing under the deponent's control that is specified in the deposition notice or a deposition subpoena, the party seeking discovery may move the court for an order compelling that answer or production.” Unlike CCP § 1987.1, CCP § 2025.480 also includes a time limit (“[t]his motion shall be made no later than 60 days after the completion of the record of the deposition”) and a meet and confer requirement (“[t]his motion . . . shall be accompanied by a meet and confer declaration under Section 2016.040”). (CCP § 2025.480(b).) Finally, CCP § 2025.480(c) requires that notice of the motion be given to all parties and to the deponent.

Discussion

On April 4, 2024, Defendant served a deposition subpoena on Dr. Ghalili, Plaintiff's primary physician. Dr. Ghalili did not produce documents or appear for his deposition scheduled for April 30, 2024. Now, Defendant moves the Court to compel Dr. Ghalili’s compliance with the deposition subpoena.

The motion contains several defects. First, the motion is brought under CCP Section 2025.450, but that statute applies to the deposition of a party. Dr. Ghalili is a non-party; therefore, the applicable statute is Section 2025.480. Nonetheless, both Sections 2025.450 and 2025.480 require the motion to contain a meet and confer declaration, which is missing.

Second, "a written notice and all moving papers supporting a motion to compel an answer to a deposition question or to compel production of a document or tangible thing from a nonparty deponent must be personally served on the nonparty deponent unless the nonparty deponent agrees to accept service by mail or electronic service at an address or electronic service address specified on the deposition record." (California Rules of Court, rule 3.1346; see Code Civ. Proc., § 1010.6.) The proof of service showed that the motion was not personally served on Dr. Ghalili, and the moving party did not provide any evidence that Dr. Ghalili agreed to accept service by mail or email.

Thus, the present motion is denied without prejudice.

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE:

If a party intends to submit on this tentative ruling, the party must send an email to the court at sscdept27@lacourt.org with the Subject line “SUBMIT” followed by the case number. The body of the email must include the hearing date and time, counsel’s contact information, and the identity of the party submitting.

Unless all parties submit by email to this tentative ruling, the parties should arrange to appear remotely (encouraged) or in person for oral argument. You should assume that others may appear at the hearing to argue.

If the parties neither submit nor appear at hearing, the Court may take the motion off calendar or adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the Court. After the Court has issued a tentative ruling, the Court may prohibit the withdrawal of the subject motion without leave.