Judge: Lynette Gridiron Winston, Case: 23PSCV03764, Date: 2024-10-07 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23PSCV03764    Hearing Date: October 7, 2024    Dept: 6

CASE NAME:  Russell Gilliam, et al. v. Ford Motor Company, et al. 

1 – Defendant Ford Motor Company’s Motion to Compel Plaintiff Lydia Gilliam’s Deposition; and

2 – Defendant Ford Motor Company’s Motion to Compel Plaintiff Russell Gilliam’s Deposition 

TENTATIVE RULING 

The Court CONTINUES the hearings on Defendant Ford Motor Company’s motions to compel Plaintiffs Lydia Gilliam and Russell Gilliams’ depositions, and orders the parties to meet and confer in person, by telephone, or by videoconference. If the parties are unable to resolve the issues underlying these motions, the Court directs the parties to request an Informal Discovery Conference. 

            Defendant Ford Motor Company is ordered to give notice of the Court’s ruling within five calendar days of this order. 

BACKGROUND 

This is a lemon law case. On December 5, 2023, plaintiffs Russell Gilliam (Russell) and Lydia Gilliam (Lydia) (collectively, Plaintiffs) filed this action against defendants Ford Motor Company (Ford), Puente Hills Ford, and Does 1 through 10, alleging causes of action for violation of subdivision (d) of Civil Code section 1793.2, violation of subdivision (b) of Civil Code section 1793.2, violation of subdivision (a)(3) of Civil Code sections 1793.2, breach of the implied warranty of merchantability, and negligent repair. 

On September 5, 2024, Ford moved to compel the depositions of Plaintiffs. On September 23, 2024, Plaintiffs opposed the motions. On September 26, 2024, Ford replied. 

LEGAL STANDARD 

(a) If, after service of a deposition notice, a party to the action or an officer, director, managing agent, or employee of a party, or a person designated by an organization that is a party under Section 2025.230, 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.

(b) A motion under subdivision (a) shall comply with both of the following:

(1) The motion shall set forth specific facts showing good cause justifying the production for inspection of any document, electronically stored information, or tangible thing described in the deposition notice.

(2) The motion shall be accompanied by a meet and confer declaration under Section 2016.040, or, when the deponent fails to attend the deposition and produce the documents, electronically stored information, or things described in the deposition notice, by a declaration stating that the petitioner has contacted the deponent to inquire about the nonappearance.

(Code Civ. Proc., § 2025, subds. (a), (b).)

DISCUSSION 

Meet and Confer 

            Per Code of Civil Procedure section 2025.450, subdivision (b)(2), Ford was required to meet and confer with Plaintiffs before bringing this motion. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2025.450, subd. (b)(2).) The Court finds Ford’s efforts to meet and confer insufficient, as there is no indication that Ford attempted to meet and confer with Plaintiffs after they objected to and did not appear at their depositions on June 6, 2024. (Moawad Decls., ¶ 7.) The Court does not find Ford’s efforts to meet and confer regarding the prior depositions set for February 29, 2024, to be sufficient since it does not address Plaintiffs’ purported failures with respect to the June 6, 2024 depositions. (Moawad Decls., ¶ 4.) The Court will therefore continue the hearings on these motions and order the parties to meet and confer. If the parties are unable to informally resolve the issues underlying these motions, the Court directs the parties to request an informal discovery conference. 

CONCLUSION 

The Court CONTINUES the hearings on Defendant Ford Motor Company’s motions to compel Plaintiffs Lydia Gilliam and Russell Gilliams’ depositions, and orders the parties to meet and confer in person, by telephone, or by videoconference. If the parties are unable to resolve the issues underlying these motions, the Court directs the parties to request an Informal Discovery Conference. 

            Defendant Ford Motor Company is ordered to give notice of the Court’s ruling within five calendar days of this order.