Judge: Nathan R. Scott, Case: Hicks v. Pacifica Hotel Co., Date: 2022-12-09 Tentative Ruling

Plaintiff Josephine Hicks’ motion to compel is granted.

Defendant Pacifica Hotel Company shall serve a complete, code-compliant, verified further response without objection to plaintiff’s special interrogatories (set two) #16 within 15 days.

Plaintiff and her counsel are ordered to keep the witnesses’ identities and contact information confidential and not use or disclose them except to investigate and litigate this case.

“The disclosure of the names and addresses of potential witnesses is a routine and essential part of pretrial discovery.”  (Puerto v. Superior Court (2008) 158 Cal.App.4th 1242, 1249-1250.)  “[A] percipient witness's willingness to participate in civil discovery has never been considered relevant—witnesses may be compelled to appear and testify whether they want to or not.”  (Id. at pp. 1251-1252.)

Plaintiff’s legitimate interest in discovering the identity of potential witnesses outweighs any legitimate privacy interests of the witnesses, especially given the protective order.  (See Williams v. Superior Court (2017) 3 Cal.5th 531, 552; see also Puerto, supra, 158 Cal.App.4th at p. 1259.) 

Plaintiff shall give notice.