Judge: Maurice A. Leiter, Case: 22STCV17762, Date: 2023-05-03 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV17762    Hearing Date: May 3, 2023    Dept: 54

Hearing Date: May 3, 2023

Department 54, Judge Maurice A. Leiter

Motion to Compel PMK Deposition and Further Responses to Requests for Production

Moving Party: Plaintiff Misty Girgle

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, opposition, and reply.

BACKGROUND

This is a lemon law action arising out of Plaintiff purchase of a 2016 Chevrolet Camaro 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 topics and to produce documents at deposition. The requests are roughly separated into three categories: the repair and repurchase of Plaintiff’s vehicle; Defendant’s policies and procedures relating to Song-Beverly compliance; and Defendant’s knowledge of, and efforts or lack of efforts to remedy, the subject defect. These categories are relevant to Plaintiff’s claims and are discoverable. To the extent that Defendant has already produced the requested documents, Defendant need not produce them again.

            The motion to compel deposition is GRANTED.