Judge: Lynne M. Hobbs, Case: 21STCV01959, Date: 2023-12-08 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV01959    Hearing Date: January 26, 2024    Dept: 30

JESSE LOPEZ,, A MINOR, BY AND THROUGH HIS GUARDIAN, DIEGO LOPEZ vs COMPTON UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

TENTATIVE

Defendant’s motions to compel the deposition of Plaintiff and his guardian ad litem are GRANTED. Plaintiff and his guardian ad litem are ordered to appear for deposition within 30 days of this order. Defendant’s request for sanctions is GRANTED. Plaintiff and Diego Lopez are ordered to pay Defendant $500 in sanctions within 30 days of this order.

Moving party to give notice.

Legal Standard

Any party may obtain discovery … by taking the oral deposition of any person, including any party to the action. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2025.010.)

Where a party objects to the deposition, the proper remedy is an objection under Code of Civil Procedure section 2025.410. If such an objection is made within three calendar days before the deposition date, the objecting party must make personal service of that objection. (Code Civ. Proc. 2025.410, subd. (b).)

CCP section 2025.450(a) provides: “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 . . . 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 . . . described in the deposition notice.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 2025.450(a).)

CCP section 2025.450(b) provides: “A motion under subdivision (a)… 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.” (Id., § 2025.450(b).)

Discussion

On January 31, 2023, the District served a deposition notice to take the deposition of Plaintiff, and Diego Lopez (“Diego”), plaintiff’s guardian ad litem, on March 8, 2023. Plaintiff and Diego failed to appear for the deposition. (Quiller Decl., 5; Exh. A.) Defense counsel’s office requested that Plaintiff’s counsel offer alternative dates of availability to take Plaintiff and Diego’s deposition. She failed to respond or reschedule the deposition. (Id., ¶ 7)

As Plaintiff and his guardian ad litem were properly served with the notice of deposition, failed to appear, and failed to file an opposition to this motion, the motions to compel Plaintiff and his guardian ad litem to appear for deposition are GRANTED. Plaintiff and his guardian ad litem are ordered to appear for deposition within 30 days of this order.

Sanctions

If a motion under CCP section¿2025.450(a) is granted, the court shall impose a monetary sanction 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. (CCP section 2025.450(g)(1).)

As the motion to compel deposition is granted, Defendant’s request for sanctions is granted, against Plaintiff and his guardian ad litem only, as the statute says nothing about imposing sanctions against the attorney. However, the amount sought is unreasonable for this straightforward motion with no opposition. Thus, the Court imposes sanctions against Guardian ad Litem Diego Lopez and in favor of Defendant, in the amount of $500 ($250 per hour, for 2 hours) to be paid within 30 days of this order.