Judge: Maurice A. Leiter, Case: 19STCV15091, Date: 2023-02-02 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 19STCV15091    Hearing Date: February 2, 2023    Dept: 54

Hearing Date: February 2, 2023

Department 54, Judge Maurice A. Leiter

(2) Motions to Compel Deposition

T/R:     PLAINTIFF’S MOTION IS GRANTED. PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS IS GRANTED.

DEFENDANTS’ MOTION IS DENIED. PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS IS GRANTED.

PLAINTIFF TO NOTICE.

If the parties wish to submit on the tentative, please email the courtroom at¿SMCdept54@lacourt.org¿with notice to opposing counsel (or self-represented party) before 8:00 am on the day of the hearing. 

            The Court considers the moving papers, opposition, and reply.

A. Plaintiff Amad Keliddari’s Motion to Compel the Deposition of Defendant Siavosh Khajavi

“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, 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.”  (CCP § 2025.450, subd. (a).)

            Plaintiff moves to compel the deposition of Siavosh Khajavi. Defendant Khajavi represents that he has agreed to be deposed on February 1, 2023, rendering the motion moot. In reply, Plaintiff provides dates for deposition and asserts Defendant must come prepared to provide available dates.

            Plaintiff is entitled to take the deposition of Defendant. If Defendant has not been deposed by the date of the hearing on this motion, the motion and Plaintiff’s request for sanctions is GRANTED. If Defendant has been deposed, the motion will be denied as moot.

B. Defendants Rodney T. Lewin and Rodney Theodore Lewin’s Motion to Enlarge Time for Plaintiff’s Deposition

            CCP § 2025.290(a) provides, “Except as provided in subdivision (b), or by any court order, including a case management order, a deposition examination of the witness by all counsel, other than the witness' counsel of record, shall be limited to seven hours of total testimony. The court shall allow additional time, beyond any limits imposed by this section, if needed to fairly examine the deponent or if the deponent, another person, or any other circumstance impedes or delays the examination.”

            Defendants move to compel Plaintiff to sit for deposition for an additional 22 hours. Plaintiff already has been deposed for approximately 5.5 hours. Defendants assert that each Defendant is entitled to 7 hours of deposition, less the time Plaintiff has already been deposed, or 22 hours. Defendants have provided no information or analysis explaining why Defendants need an additional 22 hours of deposition time to depose Plaintiff.

            Defendants’ motion is DENIED. Plaintiff’s request for sanctions is GRANTED, payable within 30 days.