Judge: Michael E. Whitaker, Case: 20STCV24202, Date: 2022-12-19 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 20STCV24202    Hearing Date: December 19, 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

            Cross-Defendants Michael Tran and Jenny Tran (collectively, “Cross-Defendants”) move to compel the deposition of  Defendant/Cross-Complainant Juan Hidalgo (“Juan”).  Juan has not filed an opposition to the motion. 

            Cross-Defendants also move to compel the deposition of Defendant/Cross-Complainant Julio Hidalgo (“Julio”).  Julio has not filed an opposition to the motion.

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(a).) 

A motion to compel a deposition must be accompanied by a meet and confer letter, “or, when the deponent fails to attend the deposition and produce the documents described in the deposition notice, … by a declaration stating that the petitioner has contacted the deponent to inquire about the nonappearance.”  (Code Civ. Proc., § 2024.450, subd. (b)(2), emphasis added).)

On June 17, 2022, Cross-Defendants served the subject deposition notices on Juan and Julio (collectively, “Cross-Complainants”).  Cross-Defendants noticed the depositions of Cross-Complainants for July 21, 2022.  Cross-Complainants failed to appear for their depositions on July 21, 2022.  As of the date of filing of this motion, Cross-Complainants have not appeared for deposition. 

Cross-Defendants’ motion failed to comply with the requirements of Code of Civil Procedure section 2024.450, subdivision (b)(2).  Here, Cross-Defendants represent that it would have been impossible to have a meaningful meet and confer with Cross-Complainants because, prior to filing the instant motion, their counsel had filed a motion to be relieved as counsel (which was denied for procedural reasons).  (Shelton Decl., ¶ 8.)  While those meet and confer efforts may not have been fruitful, Cross-Defendants assumed that those meet and confer efforts would not be meaningful, and they fail to show that they made any attempt to reschedule the depositions or that they inquired as to Cross-Complainants’ failure to appear at the depositions. 

Accordingly, the Court denies Cross-Defendants’ motions to compel the depositions of Cross-Complainants.  In addition, Cross-Defendants’ requests for sanctions are denied.

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

Therefore, the Court denies Cross-Defendants’ motions to compel the depositions of Cross-Complainants without prejudice.   

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