Judge: Lynne M. Hobbs, Case: 22STCV06810, Date: 2023-10-25 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV06810    Hearing Date: October 25, 2023    Dept: 30

AMIR MEDIZADEH vs CITY OF LOS ANGELES, A PUBLIC ENTITY, et al.

Motion to Compel Deposition of Deputy City Attorney Ticas
Motion to Compel Deposition of Plaintiff

TENTATIVE

Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Deposition of Deputy City Attorney Ticas is denied.  Moving party to give notice.
Defendant's Motion to Compel Deposition of Plaintiff is granted.  Plaintiff is ordered to sit for his deposition within 20 days of notice of ruling.  Moving party to give notice.

DISCUSSION

MOTION TO COMPEL DEPOSITION OF DCA TICAS
DCA Ticas is not a percipient witness, but signed the discovery verifications as the agent of a government entity pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure §§ 2030.250(b), 2033.240(b), 2031.250(b). The discovery verifications indicate that the information in the City’s discovery responses is “based upon information provided to [DCA Ticas] by various employees of the City of Los Angeles and others concerned with the subject matter of the within action.” (Ticas Decl., ¶ 5, Ex. B.) When an attorney verifies a discovery response as an agent of a governmental agency, only a limited waiver of the attorney-client and work product privileges exist as it “concern[s] the identity of the sources of the information contained in the response." In this case, there is no indication that a deposition, instead of written interrogatories, would be necessary. (Melendrez v. Superior Court (2013) 215 Cal.App.4th 1343, 1352-1353 (emphasis in original).)  Further, moving party does not contest that a zoom link was never provided to DCA Ticas. The Court declines to impose sanctions.

MOTION TO COMPEL PLAINTIFF'S DEPOSITION
Service of a proper deposition notices obligate the parties to attend and testify at a deposition.
(Code of Civil Procedure § 2025.280.) Here, Defendants’ counsel served a valid and proper
deposition notice for Plaintiff’s deposition. [Ticas Decl., ¶¶ 4, 6, 9; Exhs. A, E, P.] Plaintiff has failed to attend his deposition and meet and confer efforts have failed to secure plaintiff's agreement to attend his deposition.  [Ticas Decl., ¶¶ 8-9;
Exhs. H, L, M, N, O] As such, a motion to compel has become necessary.  No opposition has been filed to this regularly noticed motion.  The Court declines to impose sanctions.