Judge: Maurice A. Leiter, Case: 21STCV43687, Date: 2023-01-13 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV43687    Hearing Date: January 13, 2023    Dept: 54

Hearing Date: January 13, 2023

Department 54, Judge Maurice A. Leiter

Motion to Compel Deposition and Production of Documents

Moving Party: Defendants Fuel Enterprise, Inc. and Asaph Guirguis

Responding Party: Plaintiff Anabi Oil Corporation

T/R:     DEFENDANTS’ MOTION IS GRANTED IN PART.

PLAINTIFF TO SERVE AN UNREDACTED COPY OF THE WHOLESALE MARKETER AGREEMENT WITHIN 5 DAYS OF NOTICE OF RULING.

THE REQUESTS FOR SANCTIONS ARE DENIED.

DEFENDANTS 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.

BACKGROUND

            This action (comprised of two consolidated actions) arises from the operation of a gas station. Fuel Enterprise, Inc. purchased the Covina, California station on November 17, 2020. Anabi Oil supplied gasoline to Fuel enterprise per a Supply Contract. Fuel Enterprise terminated the agreement in November 2021. The parties dispute the amount owed by Defendant for termination of the contract.

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).)

Defendants move to compel the deposition of Plaintiff Anabi Oil’s person most knowledgeable and compel the production of documents at deposition. In opposition, Plaintiff indicates its PMK was deposed on December 14, 2022 and all documents were served at the deposition. In reply, Defendants assert Plaintiff failed to produce an unredacted version of the Wholesale Marketer Agreement as recommended by the Court at the December 6, 2022 informal discovery conference.

Plaintiff is ordered to produce an unredacted (with the exception of retailer information) copy of the Wholesale Marketer Agreement.

Defendants’ motion is GRANTED in part. As the motion was granted in part, the Court declines to award sanctions to either party.