Judge: Maurice A. Leiter, Case: 21STCV31861, Date: 2022-09-30 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV31861    Hearing Date: September 30, 2022    Dept: 54

Hearing Date: September 30, 2022

Department 54, Judge Maurice A. Leiter

Motion to Compel PMK Deposition

Moving Party: Plaintiff Aniceto Llamas

Responding Party: Defendant General Motors, LLC

T/R:     PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO COMPEL THE DEPOSITION OF DEFENDANT’S PERSON MOST KNOWLEDGEABLE IS GRANTED.

THE PARTIES ARE ORDERED TO MEET AND CONFER REGARDING A MUTUALLY AGREEABLE DATE FOR DEPOSITION.

            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. No opposition has been received

BACKGROUND

This is a lemon law action arising out of Plaintiff’s purchase of a 2016 Chevrolet Silverado, manufactured, and distributed by Defendant General Motors, LLC.

ANALYSIS

“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).)

The motion must be accompanied by a good faith 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.”  (CCP § 2025.450, subd. (b)(2).) 

Plaintiff moves to compel Defendant’s PMK on various categories as well as to produce documents at deposition, including those concerning the repair and repurchase of Plaintiff’s vehicle. Defendant’s knowledge of TSBs and recall. These categories are relevant to Plaintiff’s claims and discoverable. Defendant has not opposed this motion.

            The motion to compel deposition is GRANTED.