Judge: Michelle C. Kim, Case: 22STCV28235, Date: 2024-02-27 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV28235    Hearing Date: February 27, 2024    Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA  

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT 

 

JORGE VAZQUEZ- ESTRADA, 

Plaintiff(s), 

vs. 

 

TALLEN & TYCE DEVELOPMENT, INC., ET AL., 

Defendant(s). 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Case No.: 22STCV28235 

 

[TENTATIVE] ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO COMPEL COMPLIANCE WITH SUBPOENA WITHOUT PREJUDICE 

 

Dept. 31 

1:30 p.m.  

February 27, 2024 

 

Plaintiff Jorge Vazquez- Estrada (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against defendants Tallen & Tyce Development, Inc., Huntington Estate Homes, LLC, and 1033 Somera LLC for damages arising from an alleged improperly installed scaffolding rail.  

 

Plaintiff seeks the production of business records from EG Safety Compliance and Consulting (“EG”). FKF was defendant Summitridge’s insurance broker. Plaintiff asserts that he fell due to a scaffolding rail suddenly coming loose due to improper installation, and that EG conducted inspections of the scaffolding before and on the date of the incident. Plaintiff seeks inspection reports, videos, photographs, and communications regarding the scaffolding inspection, including documents regarding the scaffolding from which Plaintiff fell. Thus, on April 6, 2023, Plaintiff personally served EG with a deposition subpoena for production of business records. (Mot. Exh. 1.) However, EG has not responded to the subpoena or follow-up correspondence regarding the same. (Mot. Exh. 2.) 

 

Before proceeding on the merits, Plaintiff must resolve the issue of service. Plaintiff seeking an order for a nonparty to comply with Plaintiff’s deposition subpoena requires the nonparty 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 indicates EG was served by mail; however, there is no proof that EG agreed to accept service by ths method.  

 

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 26th day of February 2024 

 

  

 

 

Hon. Michelle C. Kim 

Judge of the Superior Court