Judge: Salvatore Sirna, Case: 23PSCV03425, Date: 2025-03-18 Tentative Ruling

The Court may change tentative rulings at any time. Therefore, counsel are advised to check this website periodically to determine whether any changes or updates have been made to the tentative ruling. Counsel may submit on a tentative ruling by calling the clerk in Department G at (909) 802-1104 prior to 8:30 a.m. the morning of the hearing.

Case Number: 23PSCV03425    Hearing Date: March 18, 2025    Dept: G

Defendant Min Zhou’s Motion to Quash Subpoenas Issued to Bank of America, Chase Bank, KOA Corporation, and UC Berkeley, Seeking Personal and Financial Employment Records of Min Zhou

Respondent: Plaintiff Juan Zhao

TENTATIVE RULING

Defendant Min Zhou’s Motion to Quash Subpoenas Issued to Bank of America, Chase Bank, KOA Corporation, and UC Berkeley, Seeking Personal and Financial Employment Records of Min Zhou is deemed MOOT.

Plaintiff Zhao’s request for sanctions is GRANTED.  Defendant Zhou is ordered to pay sanctions in the amount of $618.75 to Plaintiff Zhao within thirty (30) days of the issuance of this order.

BACKGROUND

This is a breach of contract and fraud action arising from a loan agreement. In May 2023, plaintiff Juan Zhao (Zhao) entered into an agreement with defendant Min Zhou in which Zhao agreed to loan a total of $1,500,000 to Min Zhou in exchange for repayment within one week. After two to three weeks later, Min Zhou told Zhao that Min Zhou would be unable to repay the loan and claimed the money had been lost in an online scam. On June 23, 2023, Min Zhou signed a written promissory note that acknowledged the loan, agreed to repay it within thirty days, and listed property in Diamond Bar as collateral for the loan. Subsequently, Zhao alleges Min Zhou failed to make any payments on the loan.

On July 25, 2023, Zhao filed a complaint in Orange County Superior Court against defendants Min Zhou, Bing Zhou, and Does 1-50, alleging the following causes of action: (1) fraud, (2) promissory estoppel, (3) fraudulent transfer, (4) breach of oral contract, (5) breach of written contract, and (6) common counts.

On October 4, 2023, the parties stipulated to the transfer of this action to the present Court.

On February 7, 2024, the Court sustained Min Zhou’s demurrer to the Complaint in part with leave to amend.

On February 27, 2024, Zhao filed a First Amended Complaint (FAC) against the same defendants alleging the same causes of action.¿On May 29, 2024, the Court sustained Min Zhou’s demurrer to the FAC in part without leave to amend as to the fifth cause of action.

On June 17, 2024, Min Zhou filed an answer to the FAC.

On July 29, 2024, Zhao demurred to Min Zhou’s answer. On October 30, 2024, the Court sustained Zhao’s entire demurrer.

On February 3, 2025, Min Zhou filed this present motion. A hearing on the present motion and a case management conference are set for March 18, 2025, with a hearing on application for writ of attachment set for April 10, 2025, two motions to quash or limit deposition subpoena set for May 7, 2025, and one motion to quash or limit deposition subpoena set for May 8, 2025.

ANALYSIS

Min Zhou moves to quash subpoenas issued to Bank of America, Chase Bank, KOA Corporation, and UC Berkeley for personal financial and employment records of Min Zhou. For the following reasons, the court deems MOOT Defendant’s motion.

Legal Standard

If a subpoena requires the attendance of a witness or the production of books, documents, electronically stored information, or other things before a court, or at the trial of an issue therein, or at the taking of a deposition, the court, upon motion reasonably made by any person described in subdivision (b), or upon the court's own motion after giving counsel notice and an opportunity to be heard, may make an order quashing the subpoena entirely, modifying it, or directing compliance with it upon those terms or conditions as the court shall declare, including protective orders. In addition, the court may make any other order as may be appropriate to protect the person from unreasonable or oppressive demands such as unreasonable violations of the right of privacy.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 1987.1.)

Discussion

In opposition, Plaintiff Zhao informs the court that Plaintiff withdrew the subpoenas on or about January 17, 2025, and that counsel for Defendant Zhou is aware of the withdrawal. (Opp., pp. 1:25-2:20.) The declaration of Michael E. Israel, Esq. confirms Plaintiff withdrew all four (4) subpoenas with the understanding that the subpoenas would be re-issued with another production date. (Israel Decl., ¶ 2, Exh. 1, p. 1.) Because Plaintiff withdrew the subject subpoenas weeks prior to the filing of the instant motion, the court finds the motion to be MOOT.

Plaintiff’s Request for Sanctions

Plaintiff moves for sanctions under Code of Civil Procedure section 1987.2, subdivision (a). The court agrees that Plaintiff is entitled to sanctions since Defendant filed the motion without substantial justification when they knew that Plaintiff had previously withdrawn the subpoenas weeks before.

Utilizing a lodestar approach and in view of the totality of the circumstances, the court awards Plaintiff reasonable attorney fees in the reduced amount of $618.75 (1.5 hour drafting the opposition and 0.75 hours attending the hearing at an hourly rate of $275.)

CONCLUSION

Based on the foregoing, Defendant Min Zhou’s Motion to Quash Subpoenas Issued to Bank of America, Chase Bank, KOA Corporation, and UC Berkeley, Seeking Personal and Financial Employment Records of Min Zhou is deemed MOOT.

Sanctions are awarded to Plaintiff Zhao in the amount of $618.75, payable by Defendant within thirty (30) days of the issuance of this order.