Judge: Melvin D. Sandvig, Case: 19CHCV00470, Date: 2022-10-20 Tentative Ruling

Counsel wishing to submit on a tentative ruling may inform the clerk or courtroom assisant in North Valley Department F47, 9425 Penfield Ave., Chatsworth, CA 91311, at (818) 407-2247.  Please be aware that unless all parties submit, the matter will still be called for hearing and may be argued by any appearing/non-submitting parties. If the matter is submitted on the court's tentative ruling by all parties, counsel for moving party shall give notice of ruling. This may be done by incorporating verbatim the court's tentative ruling. The tentative ruling may be extracted verbatim by copying and specially pasting, as unformatted text, from the Los Angeles Superior Court’s website, http://www.lasuperiorcourt.org. All hearings on law and motion and other calendar matters are generally NOT transcribed by a court reporter unless one is provided by the party(ies).

Case Number: 19CHCV00470    Hearing Date: October 20, 2022    Dept: F47

Dept. F47

Date: 10/20/22                                                          TRIAL DATE: 2/27/23

Case #19CHCV00470

MOTION TO COMPEL COMPLIANCE WITH DEPOSITION SUBPOENA

Motion filed on 7/14/22.

MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff Ronald Kari

RESPONDING PARTY: Defaulted Defendant Bradley Arthur Hirou

NOTICE: ok

RELIEF REQUESTED: An order pursuant to CCP 1987.1 compelling defaulted Defendant Bradley Hirou to comply with Plaintiff’s Deposition Subpoena for testimony and production of documents.  Additionally, Plaintiff requests sanctions against Hirou in the amount of $2,000.

RULING: The motion is granted, in part, and denied, in part. 

This is an accounting action relating to Plaintiff Ronald Kari, Jr.’s (Plaintiff) investments in a series of film projects for which Defendants have not returned the investment, nor any profits, despite the success of the films.

After being served, via substituted service, with the summons and Second Amended Complaint in this action, Bradley Arthur Hirou failed to answer the Complaint.  (See Robinson Decl., Ex.1).  Instead, on 11/3/20, Hirou filed an Affidavit.  (Id., Ex.2).  On 6/18/21, the clerk entered Hirou’s default.  (Id. Ex.3).

On 4/18/22, Plaintiff personally served Hirou with a subpoena to appear for deposition on 5/16/22.  (Robinson Decl., Ex.4).  Hirou did not serve objections, did not appear and did not produce documents.  (Id., Ex.5).  Hirou failed to respond to meet and confer efforts after his failure to appear.  (Robinson Decl. ¶¶8-9, Ex.6).   

On 7/14/22, Plaintiff filed and served the instant motion seeking an order pursuant to CCP 1987.1 compelling defaulted Defendant Bradley Arthur Hirou to comply with the Deposition Subpoena for Production of Business Records issued on 4/15/22 and served on 4/18/22.  Additionally, Plaintiff requests sanctions against Hirou in the amount of $2,000.

The unopposed request to compel defaulted Defendant Bradley Arthur Hirou to comply with the Deposition Subpoena for Production of Business Records issued on 4/15/22 and served on 4/18/22 is granted.  See CCP 1987.1.  Plaintiff’s request for sanctions is denied.

CCP 1987.2(a) provides: 

Except as specified in subdivision (c), in making an order pursuant to motion made under subdivision (c) of Section 1987 or under Section 1987.1, the court may in its discretion award the amount of the reasonable expenses incurred in making or opposing the motion, including reasonable attorney's fees, if the court finds the motion was made or opposed in bad faith or without substantial justification or that one or more of the requirements of the subpoena was oppressive.

(emphasis added).

Hirou has not opposed the motion, therefore, the Court cannot find that the motion was opposed in bad faith or without substantial justification as required for the imposition of sanctions under CCP 1987.2(a).