Judge: Malcolm Mackey, Case: 20STCV12973, Date: 2022-07-28 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 20STCV12973    Hearing Date: July 28, 2022    Dept: 55

MAGNOLIA APTS., INC. v. ALTURA ROOFING CORP.                   20STCV12973 

Hearing Date:  7/28/22,  Dept. 55

#5:   

1.      MOTION FOR AN ORDER COMPELLING DEPOSITIONS OF: 1. BALBOA POINTE APTS., INC., dba BALBOA POINTE APARTMENTS; 2. 2175 S. MALLUL DRIVE, LLC; 3. HACIENDA GARDEN APARTMENTS, INC. dba HACIENDA GARDEN APARTMENTS; AND, 4. REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,025 AGAINST SAID WITNESSES AND THEIR COUNSEL OF RECORD, AND OSC RE CONTEMPT

2.      MOTION FOR AN ORDER COMPELLING MAGNOLIA APARTMENTS, INC. DBA STUDIO VILLAGE APARTMENTS TO COMPLY WITH DEPOSITION NOTICE, REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,025 AGAINST SAID 'WITNESS AND ITS COUNSEL OF RECORD, AND OSC RE CONTEMPT.

Notice:  Okay

No Opposition

MP:  Defendant/Cross-Complainant ROOF SUPPLY G&F SAN DIEGO.

RP:  

Summary

On 4/2/20, Plaintiff filed a Complaint alleging that the quality of the replaced roofs was below professional roofing standards, including because of damaging water leakage, and other roofs were not replaced, in breach of contract.

The causes of action are:

1. BREACH OF CONTRACT;

2. BREACH OF IMPLIED COVENANT OF GOOD FAITH AND FAIR DEALING;

3. NEGLIGENCE;

4. DECLARATORY RELIEF.

On 5/19/20, Defendant ROOF SUPPLY G&F SAN DIEGO filed a Cross-Complaint against plaintiffs, co-defendants and others, for:

1. BREACH OF WRITTEN CONTRACT;

2. QUANTUM MERUIT;

3. OPEN BOOK ACCOUNT;

4. IMPLIED INDEMNITY;

5. ON CONTRACTOR'S LICENSE  BOND;

6. FORECLOSURE OF MECHANICS LIENS.

On 4/13/22, Defendant ROOF SUPPLY G&F SAN DIEGO file a motion for leave to file a First Amended Cross-Complaint, filed 5/23/22, to assert additional claims of Goods and Services Rendered, against plaintiffs BALBOA POINTE APTS., INC. and MAGNOLIA APTS., INC., because allegedly ROOF SUPPLY had provided uncompensated services and materials on the project.

MP Positions

Moving party requests orders compelling attendance at depositions, and imposing monetary sanctions ($2,025 for each motion), on grounds including the following:

·         The plaintiffs failed to attend their noticed depositions.

·         No explanation or rescheduling was provided by the deponents, except co-Plaintiff MAGNOLIA APARTMENTS, INC. had expressed a calendaring conflict.

Tentative Ruling

Both unopposed motions are granted, as prayed.

The Court will sign and file proposed orders from the moving party.

A motion lies to compel deposition attendance and document production, after service of a deposition notice, where a deponent fails to appear at, or proceed with, a deposition, without having served a valid objection.  CCP §2025.450(a).