Judge: Robert B. Broadbelt, Case: 23STCV31677, Date: 2025-03-19 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23STCV31677    Hearing Date: March 19, 2025    Dept: 53

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles – Central District

Department 53

MOVING PARTY:                 Plaintiff Kuzyk Law, LLP

RESPONDING PARTY:       Defendant Augustine Flores

Motion to Compel Compliance with Subpoena

The court considered the moving and opposition papers filed in connection with this motion.  No reply papers were filed.

DISCUSSION

Plaintiff Kuzyk Law, LLP (“Plaintiff”) moves the court for an order (1) compelling nonparty Bank of America, N.A. (“Bank of America”) to comply with Plaintiff’s Deposition Subpoena for the Production of Business Records, and (2) awarding monetary sanctions in favor of Plaintiff and against Bank of America in the amount of $1,152.

The court finds that Plaintiff has not properly served Bank of America with the pending motion.

“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 Ct., rule 3.1346.)

Plaintiff has attached a proof of service to its motion to compel Bank of America’s compliance with Plaintiff’s deposition subpoena, in which Plaintiff states that it served the pending motion on Bank of America by mail and email.  (Mot., pp. 19-20 [proof of service].)  Thus, Plaintiff has not filed a proof of personal service of this motion on Bank of America as required.  (Cal. Rules of Ct., rule 3.1346.)  Further, Plaintiff did not submit evidence showing that Bank of America agreed to accept service by mail or electronic service at the physical and email addresses of service “on the deposition record.”  (Ibid.)

Thus, the court finds that Plaintiff has not shown that it properly served Bank of America with this motion.  The court therefore denies Plaintiff’s motion, without prejudice to Plaintiff’s filing a new motion that is accompanied by a proof of service that complies with California Rules of Court, rule 3.1346.

ORDER

            The court denies plaintiff Kuzyk Law, LLP’s motion to compel compliance with subpoena, without prejudice to plaintiff Kuzyk Law, LLP’s filing a new motion that cures the defect with service set forth in this order.

            The court orders defendant Augustine Flores to give notice of this ruling.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED:  March 19, 2025

_____________________________

Robert B. Broadbelt III

Judge of the Superior Court