Judge: Michael E. Whitaker, Case: 20STCV06823, Date: 2022-09-07 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 20STCV06823    Hearing Date: September 7, 2022    Dept: 32

PLEASE NOTE:   Parties are encouraged to meet and confer concerning this tentative ruling to determine if a resolution may be reached.  If the parties are unable to reach a resolution and a party intends to submit on this tentative ruling, the party must send an email to the Court at sscdept32@lacourt.org indicating that party’s intention to submit.  The email shall include the case number, date and time of the hearing, counsel’s contact information (if applicable), and the identity of the party submitting on this tentative ruling.  If the Court does not receive an email indicating the parties are submitting on this tentative ruling and there are no appearances at the hearing, the Court may place the motion off calendar or adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the Court.  If all parties do not submit on this tentative ruling, they should arrange to appear in-person or remotely (which is highly encouraged).  Further, after the Court has posted/issued a tentative ruling, the Court has the inherent authority to prohibit the withdrawal of the subject motion and adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the Court. 

TENTATIVE RULING

MOTION

            Plaintiff Ronald Ortiz sued defendants Randall Pomeroy and Janell Pomeroy (collectively, “Defendants”) based on a slip and fall on property owned and controlled by Defendants.  Defendants move to compel Plaintiff’s appearance for deposition.  Plaintiff has not filed an opposition to the motion, apart from a Declaration of Raymond Ghermezian, counsel for Plaintiff.

ANALYSIS

Per Code of Civil Procedure section 2025.450, if a party to the action fails to appear for deposition after service of a deposition notice and the party has not served a valid objection to that deposition notice, the party that noticed the deposition may move for an order to compel the deponent’s attendance and testimony.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 2025.450, subd. (a).) 

Here, on June 2, 2022, Defendants served the subject deposition notice on Plaintiff.  Defendants noticed Plaintiff’s deposition for June 20, 2022. Plaintiff did not appear for deposition on that date.  As of the date of filing of the motion, Plaintiff has not appeared for deposition. 

Defendants seek monetary sanctions in connection with the motion. The Court finds Plaintiff’s failure to appear for deposition to be an abuse of the discovery process, warranting monetary sanctions. (See Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2023.010, subd. (d), 2025.450, subd. (g)(1).) Accordingly, the Court will impose monetary sanctions against Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s counsel of record, Raymond Ghermezian, A Professional Law Corporation, in the amount of $2,434.10, which represents 3 hours of attorney time to prepare the motion at $225 per hour, plus the $1,759.10 in costs incurred in connection with the June 20, 2022 deposition.  

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

Therefore, the Court grants Defendants’ motion to compel Plaintiff’s appearance for deposition per Code of Civil Procedure section 2025.450, and orders Plaintiff to appear for deposition within 30 days of notice of the Court’s orders, unless Defendant stipulates otherwise.

Further, the Court orders Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s counsel of record, Raymond Ghermezian, A Professional Law Corporation, jointly and severally, to pay monetary sanctions in the amount of $2,434.10 to Defendants, by and through counsel for Defendants, within 30 days of notice of the Court’s orders.

Defendants shall provide notice of the Court’s orders and file a proof of service of such.