Judge: Stephen I. Goorvitch, Case: 22STCV08529, Date: 2023-03-30 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 22STCV08529 Hearing Date: March 30, 2023 Dept: 39
Joe Phem v. Office
Depot, LLC, et al.
Case No.
22STCV08529
Motion to Compel
Further Responses
Plaintiff
Joe Phem (“Plaintiff”) filed this wrongful termination case against Office
Depot, LLC (“Defendant”). Now, Plaintiff
moves to compel further responses to Requests for Production of Documents, Set
One (“RPD”). The motion is granted in
part and denied in part.
Many of Defendant’s responses do
not comply with Code of Civil Procedure section 2031.220, which requires
defendant to make clear whether the documents “in the possession, custody, or
control of [Defendant]” will be produced “in whole or in part.” Defendant merely states that certain
documents will be produced without making the necessary certification. For example, in response to RPD #1, Defendant
states that it will produce “Plaintiff’s annual performance evaluations and
Plaintiff’s written disciplinary records” without making clear that all
performance reviews are being produced.
The Court rules as follows:
RPD #1 – Granted
RPD #2 – Granted
RPD #3 – Granted in part; denied in
part. Defendant shall produce copies of
personnel, human resource and employee handbooks that applied to Plaintiff
specifically (and not every employee).
RPD #4 - Granted in part; denied in part. Defendant shall produce copies of any rules
and policies that applies to Plaintiff specifically (and not every employee).
RPD #5 – Denied. This request is vague and overbroad. Defendant is only required to produce
Plaintiff’s employment application and onboarding documents, so the response is
code-compliant.
RPD #6 – Granted in part; denied in
part. This request is overbroad, as it
seeks every email and hard copy letter/note that Plaintiff sent to all
“representatives, affiliates, employees, agents or assigns, and any
representatives or persons acting or authority to act on their behalf.” In other words, Plaintiff seeks every written
communication between Plaintiff and anyone else who worked for Defendant for
over 25 years. Defendant shall produce
Plaintiff’s personnel file and all correspondence contained therein. Defendant also shall produce all
correspondence between Plaintiff and Defendant concerning the following issues:
(1) Any medical issue or condition, including both physical and mental conditions;
(2) Any request for accommodation; (3) Any leave of absence or absence for
medical reasons; and (4) His resignation, retirement, job abandonment, or
termination. The motion is denied in all
other respects.
RPD #7 – Granted in part; denied in
part. Defendant shall produce any policies
and procedures over the past five years concerning the reasonable
accommodations process.
RPD #8 – Granted in part; denied in
part. Defendant shall produce all
policies and procedures over the past five years concerning leaves of absence.
RPD #9 – Granted in part; denied in
part. Defendant shall produce all
policies and procedures over the past five years concerning discrimination.
RPD #10 – See above.
RPD #11 – See above.
RPD #12 – See above.
RPD #15 – The Court will not order
Defendant to reveal communications about other employees without providing the
employees notice and an opportunity to opt out of the disclosure of their
identities and contact information, under Belaire-West Landscape, Inc. v. Superior
Court (2007) 149 Cal.App.4th 554.
Accordingly, the Court orders Defendant to redact any identifying
information regarding its employees in these responses unless the parties
comply with the Belaire-West notice process.
RPD #17 – Granted in part; denied
in part. Defendant shall produce
Plaintiff’s personnel file, as well as all performance evaluations and
disciplinary records; Plaintiff’s complete salary history and summary of
benefits; and a summary of his job duties for every position he held.
RPD #18 – See above.
RPD #31 – See above.
RPD #32 – See above.
RPD #33 – Granted. Defendant shall make clear whether the
specified documents are responsive “in whole or in part.”
RPD #34 – Granted. Defendant shall make clear whether the specified
documents are responsive “in whole or in part.”
RPD #35 – Granted. Defendant shall make clear whether the
specified documents are responsive “in whole or in part.”
RPD #36 – See above.
RPD #37 – See above.
RPD #38 – See above.
RPD #39 – Granted. Defendant shall produce all documents
concerning any reasonable accommodation that Plaintiff requested, and/or that
Defendant discussed or considered.
RPD #40 – Granted. Defendant shall make clear whether the
specified documents are responsive “in whole or in part.”
RPD #41 – Granted. Defendant shall make clear whether the
specified documents are responsive “in whole or in part.”
RPD #42 – Granted. Defendant shall make clear whether the
specified documents are responsive “in whole or in part.”
RPD #44 – See above.
RPD #48 – Granted. Defendant shall produce all communications
concerning Plaintiff’s medical condition and any related leave during his
employment, regardless of whether Plaintiff was a party to the communication.
RPD #49 – Granted. Defendant shall produce all communications
concerning Plaintiff’s disabilities and any request for accommodation,
regardless of whether Plaintiff was a party to the communication.
RPD #50 – See above.
RPD #53 – See above.
RPD #60 – Granted. Defendant shall produce any policies concerning
the discipline and termination of employees.
Defendant shall make clear whether the specified documents are
responsive “in whole or in part.”
RPD #61 – See above.
RPD #62 – Granted in part; denied
in part. This request is overbroad and
may include every email that a supervisor sent to Plaintiff over the course of
25 years of employment. Defendant shall
produce every evaluation and disciplinary record of Plaintiff.
RPD #63 – See above.
RPD #64 – See above.
RPD #65 – Granted. Defendant shall make clear whether the
specified documents are responsive “in whole or in part.”
RPD #66 – See above
RPD #67 – Denied. This request is vague and overbroad and is
not conducive to electronic search terms to retrieve electronically stored
information. Plaintiff will receive
relevant documents in response to other RPDs.
Therefore, this request is denied.
RPD #68 – Denied. This request is vague and overbroad and is
not conducive to electronic search terms to retrieve electronically stored
information. Plaintiff will receive
relevant documents in response to other RPDs.
Therefore, this request is denied.
RPD #70 – Denied. This request is vague and overbroad and is
not conducive to electronic search terms to retrieve electronically stored
information. Plaintiff will receive
relevant documents in response to other RPDs.
Therefore, this request is denied.
RPD #71 – Granted in part; denied
in part. Defendant shall produce all
documents and communications concerning Plaintiff’s resignation, retirement, job
abandonment, or termination.
RPD #73 – The Court will not order
Defendant to reveal communications about other employees without providing the
employees notice and an opportunity to opt out of the disclosure of their
identities and contact information, under Belaire-West Landscape, Inc. v.
Superior Court (2007) 149 Cal.App.4th 554.
Accordingly, the Court orders Defendant to redact any identifying
information regarding its employees in these responses unless the parties
comply with the Belaire-West notice process.
RPD #76 – Granted. Defendant shall produce all documents
concerning benefits received by Plaintiff, including disability benefits.
RPD #77 – Granted. Defendant shall produce all non-privileged
communications with third-party claims administrators, claims managers, and/or
companies that process disability/employment claims regarding Plaintiff.
RPD #78 – See above.
Based upon the foregoing, the Court
orders as follows:
1. Defendant
shall provide code-compliant responses within thirty (30) days.
2. Both
parties’ requests for sanctions are denied.
The record reflects a good-faith effort to resolve the dispute, but
Defendant’s responses were not code-compliant in many respects, and Plaintiff’s
requests were overbroad and duplicative in many respects. Therefore, any award of sanctions would be
unjust.
3. Plaintiff
shall provide notice and file proof of such with the Court.