Judge: Melvin D. Sandvig, Case: 23CHCV02717, Date: 2024-10-01 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: 23CHCV02717    Hearing Date: October 1, 2024    Dept: F47

Dept. F47

Date: 10/1/24                                                              TRIAL DATE: 9/29/25

Case #23CHCV02717 (consolidated with 24CHCV00881)

MOTION TO COMPEL DEPOSITION

Motion filed on 7/26/24.

MOVING PARTY: Defendant Vardan Arakelian

RESPONDING PARTY: Non-Party Esther Linares

RELIEF REQUESTED: An order compelling non-party witness Esther Linares to appear at deposition. 

RULING: The motion is placed off calendar.

SUMMARY OF FACTS & PROCEDURAL HISTORY

These consolidated actions arise out of a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 6/4/22.

On 5/14/24, Defendant Vardan Arakelian served a Deposition Subpoena on non-party witness Esther Linares (Linares) to appear for deposition on 6/17/24.  (Rickett Decl. ¶2, Ex.A).  Linares failed to appear for her deposition.  (Rickett Decl. ¶2).  Linares also failed to respond to Arakelian’s meet and confer efforts.  (Rickett Decl. ¶¶3-4, Ex.B). 

Therefore, on 7/26/24, Arakelian filed and served the instant motion seeking an order compelling non-party witness Esther Linares to appear at deposition.  No opposition or other response to the motion has been filed. 

ANALYSIS

The proofs of service attached to the moving papers do not show that the motion was served on Linares, a non-party deponent, as required.  See CRC 3.1346.  Rather, the proofs of service show that the motion papers were only served on counsel for the parties in these consolidated cases.  As noted above, there is no response to the motion from Linares to cure the defect in notice. 

Additionally, the Memorandum of Points and Authorities filed in support of the motion does not include any authority – i.e., there are no citations to any statutes, cases and/or court rules.  (See Memorandum of Points & Authorities, generally); CRC 3.1113(b).

CONCLUSION

The motion is placed off calendar.