Judge: Michelle C. Kim, Case: 22STCV27253, Date: 2024-04-18 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV27253    Hearing Date: April 18, 2024    Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA  

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT 

 

HARJINDER SINGH RANDHAWA, 

Plaintiff(s), 

vs. 

 

SANDRA SMETHURST, ET AL., 

Defendant(s). 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Case No.: 22STCV27253 

 

[TENTATIVE] ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO COMPEL DEPOSITION OF NON-PARTY  

 

Dept. 31 

1:30 p.m.  

April 18, 2024 

 

I. BACKGROUND 

Plaintiff Harjinder Singh Randhawa (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against defendants Sandra Smethurst and Buddy Lee Smithers (“Defendants”) for damages arising from a motor vehicle collision.  

Defendants now move to compel the deposition of non-party Gagandeep Singh (“Singh”), who is the person most knowledgeable (“PMK”) at Diamond Sea, Inc. Defendants asserts they served Singh with a valid deposition subpoena that required Singh to appear for his deposition on November 29, 2023, but Singh did not appear for his deposition.  

The motion is unopposed. 

 

II. MOTION TO COMPEL NON-PARTY DEPOSITION¿ 

  1. Legal Standard 

A party seeking discovery from a person who is not a party to the action may obtain discovery by oral deposition, written deposition, or deposition subpoena for production of business records.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 2020.010.) A deposition subpoena may command: (1) only the attendance and testimony of the deponent, (2) only the production of business records for copying, or (3) the attendance and testimony of the deponent, as well as the production of business records, other documents, electronically stored information, and tangible things. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2020.020.) 

A service of a deposition subpoena shall be effected a sufficient time in advance of the deposition to provide the deponent a reasonable opportunity to locate and produce any designated documents and, where personal attendance is commanded, a reasonable time to travel to the place of deposition.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 2020.220, subd. (a).) Personal service of any deposition subpoena is effective to require a deponent who is a resident of California to: personally appear and testify, if the subpoena so specifies; to produce any specified documents; and to appear at a court session if the subpoena so specifies.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 2020.220, subd. (c).) A deponent who disobeys a deposition subpoena may be punished for contempt without the necessity of a prior order of the court directing compliance by the witness.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 2020.240.) 

A “written notice and all moving papers supporting a motion to compel an answer to a deposition question or to compel production of a document or tangible thing from a nonparty deponent must be personally served on the nonparty deponent unless the nonparty deponent agrees to accept service by mail¿or electronic service¿at an address¿or electronic service address¿specified on the deposition record.”  (Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 3.1346.)    

 

  1. Discussion 

In this case, Defendants asserts that Plaintiff produced several IRS forms 1099-NEC from Diamond Sea, Inc., and that the wage records for this employer is necessary to fully investigate Plaintiff’s claims for lost wages. Defendants aver that Singh was personally served with a deposition subpoena for his appearance on November 29, 2023, and that Singh confirmed by telephone the day prior to his deposition that he had received notice of his deposition. 

However, the motion is denied without prejudice for two reasons. First, Defendants must resolve the issue of service. Defendants seeking an order for a non-party to comply with their deposition subpoena requires the non-party to also be served with the moving papers by personal service, unless the nonparty agrees to accept service by mail or electronic service. (California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1346.) The proof of service demonstrates only Plaintiff was served.  

Second, a motion to compel deposition “shall be accompanied by a 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(b)(2).) Here, Defendants have failed to submit a meet and confer declaration stating that defense counsel contacted the deponent to inquire about the nonappearance pursuant to CCP § 2025.450(b)(2). 

 

III. CONCLUSION¿ 

Defendants must resolve the aforementioned procedural issues before the Court is able to proceed on the merits. The motion is therefore denied without prejudice. 

 

Moving party is ordered to give notice.   

 

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE: 

  • Parties are encouraged to meet and confer after reading this tentative ruling to see if they can reach an agreement. 

  • If a party intends to submit on this tentative ruling,¿the party must send an email to the court at¿sscdept31@lacourt.org¿with the Subject line “SUBMIT” followed by the case number.¿ The body of the email must include the hearing date and time, counsel’s contact information, and the identity of the party submitting.¿¿ 

  • Unless¿all¿parties submit by email to this tentative ruling, the parties should arrange to appear remotely (encouraged) or in person for oral argument.¿ You should assume that others may appear at the hearing to argue.¿¿ 

  • If the parties neither submit nor appear at hearing, the Court may take the motion off calendar or adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the Court.¿ After the Court has issued a tentative ruling, the Court may prohibit the withdrawal of the subject motion without leave.¿ 

 

Dated this 17th day of April 2024 

 

  

 

 

Hon. Michelle C. Kim 

Judge of the Superior Court