Judge: Steven A. Ellis, Case: 21STCV03072, Date: 2024-01-03 Tentative Ruling
DEPARTMENT 29 - LAW AND MOTION RULINGS IMPORTANT (PLEASE SEND YOUR E-MAIL TO DEPT. 29 NOT DEPT. 2)
Communicating with the Court Staff re the Tentative Ruling 1. Please notify the courtroom staff by email not later than 9:30 a.m. on the day of the hearing if you wish to submit on the tentative ruling rather than argue the motion. The email address is SSCDEPT29@lacourt.org. Please do not use any other email address. 2. You must include the other parties on the email by "cc." 3. Include the word "SUBMISSION" in all caps in the Subject line and include your name, contact information, the case number, and the party you represent in the body of the email. If you submit on the tentative and elect not to appear at the hearing, the opposing party may nevertheless appear at the hearing and argue the motions. THE COURT WILL HEAR ARGUMENT UNLESS BOTH SIDES SUBMIT ON THE TENTATIVE. 4. Include the words "SUBMISSION BUT WILL APPEAR" if you submit, but one or both parties will nevertheless appear. 5. For other communications with Court Staff a. OFF-CALENDAR should appear in all caps in the Subject line where all parties have agreed to have a matter placed off-calendar. All counsel should be cc'ed (and where appropriate parties not represented by counsel) and the body of the email should state: (a) name and case number; (b) date of proceeding. b. CASE SETTLED should appear in all caps in the Subject line where all parties have agreed that the case has settled for all purposes. All counsel should be cc'ed (and where appropriate parties not represented by counsel) and the body of the email should state: (a) name and case number; (b) whether notice of settlement/dismissal documents have been filed; (c) if (b) has not been done, a date one year from the date of your email which will be a date set by the court for an OSC for dismissal of the case. c. STIPULATION should appear in all caps in the Subject line where all parties have stipulated that a matter before the court can be postponed. All counsel should be cc'ed (and where appropriate parties not represented by counsel) and the body of the email should state: (a) name and case number; (b) what proceeding is agreed to be postponed e.g. Trial, FSC; (c) the agreed-upon future date; (d) whether all parties waive notice if the Court informs all counsel/parties that the agreed-upon date is satisfactory. This communication should be used only for matters that are agreed to be postponed and not for orders shortening time. 6. PLEASE MAKE SURE THAT ALL COMMUNICATIONS WITH COURT STAFF DEAL ONLY WITH SCHEDULING AND ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS AND DO NOT DISCUSS THE MERITS OF ANY CASE. (UPDATED 6/17/2020)
IMPORTANT: In light of the COVID-19 emergency, the Court encourages all parties to appear remotely. The capacity in the courtroom is extremely limited. The Court appreciates the cooperation of counsel and the litigants.
ALSO NOTE: If the moving party does not contact the court to submit on the tentative and does not appear (either remotely or in person), the motion will be taken off calendar. THE TENTATIVE RULING WILL NOT BE THE ORDER OF THE COURT.
Case Number: 21STCV03072 Hearing Date: April 5, 2024 Dept: 29
Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel the Deposition of Defendant’s
Person Most Knowledgeable
Tentative
The motion is denied without prejudice.
Background
On January
26, 2021, Margarita Cruz Santamaria (“Plaintiff”) filed a complaint against Los
Angeles Metropolitan Transportation Authority (“Defendant”) and Does 1 through 50
arising out of injuries alleged sustained on May 6, 2020, on a 720 bus near the
intersection of Wilshire Boulevard and Westwood Boulevard in Los Angeles. On June 4, 2021, Plaintiff filed a First Amended
Complaint (“FAC”), asserting a single cause of action for negligence. Defendant filed an answer to the FAC on June
22, 2021.
On four
occasions, Plaintiff has noticed the deposition of Defendant’s Person Most
Qualified (PMQ) on enumerated topics.
(Rodriguez Decl., ¶¶ 4-7 & Exhs. A-D.) Most recently, on December 7, 2023, Plaintiff
served a deposition notice, setting the deposition of December 19. (Id., ¶ 7 & Exh. D.) Defendant served an objection on December
15. (Id., ¶ 8 & Exh. E.) Plaintiff took Defendant’s non-appearance on
December 19. (Id., ¶ 9 & Exh.
F.)
On February
20, 2024, Plaintiff filed this motion to compel the deposition of Defendant’s PMQ. Plaintiff also seeks sanctions. Defendant filed an opposition on March 22, and
Plaintiff filed a reply on March 28.
Legal Standard
“Any party may obtain discovery … by taking in California the oral
deposition of any person, including any party to the action.” (Code Civ. Proc., §
2025.010.) Code of Civil Procedure
sections 2025.210 through 2025.280 provide the requirements for (among other
things) what must be included in a deposition notice, when and where
depositions may be taken, and how and when the notice must be served.
“The service of a deposition notice … is effective to require any
deponent who is a party to the action or an officer, director, managing agent,
or employee of a party to attend and to testify, as well as to produce any
document, electronically stored information, or tangible thing for inspection
and copying.” (Code Civ. Proc., §
2025.280, subd. (a).)
Section 2025.230 provides: “If the deponent named is not a natural
person, the deposition notice shall describe with reasonable particularity the
matters on which examination is requested.
In that event, the deponent shall designate and produce at the
deposition those of its officers, directors, managing agents, employees, or
agents who are most qualified to testify on its behalf as to those matters to
the extent of any information known or reasonably available to the
deponent.”
Section 2025.410, subdivision (a), requires any party to serve a
written objection at least three days before the deposition if the party
contends that a deposition notice does not comply with the provisions of
sections 2025.210 through 2025.280.
“If, after service of a deposition notice, a party to the action
or an officer, director, managing agent, or employee of a party, or a person designated by an organization
that is a party under Section 2025.230, without having served a valid objection under Section 2025.410,
fails to appear for examination, or to proceed with it, or to produce
for¿inspection any document, electronically stored information, or tangible
thing described in the deposition notice, the party giving the notice may move
for an order compelling the deponent’s attendance and testimony, and the
production for inspection of any document, electronically stored information,
or tangible thing described in the deposition notice.” (Code Civ. Proc., §
2025.450, subd. (a).) Any such motion to compel must show good
cause for the production of documents and, when a deponent has failed to
appear, the motion must be accompanied “by a declaration stating that the
petitioner has contacted the deponent to inquire about the nonappearance.” (Id., subd. (b).) “Implicit in the requirement that counsel contact
the deponent to inquire about the nonappearance is a requirement that counsel
listen to the reasons offered and make a good faith attempt to resolve the
issue,” including by rescheduling. (Leko v. Cornerstone Bldg. Inspection
Serv. (2001) 86 Cal.App.4th 1109, 1124. See
also L.A.S.C.L.R. 3.26, Appendix 3.A(e) (reasonable consideration should be
given to accommodating schedules in setting depositions).)
When a motion to compel is granted, “the court shall impose a
monetary sanction under Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 2023.010) in favor
of the party who noticed the deposition and against the deponent or the party
with whom the deponent is affiliated, unless the court finds that the one
subject to the sanction acted with substantial justification or that other
circumstances make the imposition of the sanction unjust.” (Code Civ.
Proc., § 2025.450, subd. (g)(1).)
In Chapter 7 of the Civil Discovery Act, section 2023.010,
subdivision (d), defines “[m]isuses of the discovery process” to include
“[f]ailing to respond to or to submit to an authorized method of
discovery.” Where a party or attorney
has engaged in misuse of the discovery process, the court may impose a monetary
sanction in the amount of “the reasonable expenses, including attorney’s fees,
incurred by anyone as a result of that conduct.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 2023.030,
subd. (a).)
Discussion
Plaintiff plainly has a right to take the
deposition of Defendant.
To obtain a court order compelling such a
deposition, however, Plaintiff must comply with certain statutory
requirements. One of these is that the
motion must be accompanied “by a declaration stating that the petitioner
has contacted the deponent to inquire about the nonappearance.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 2025.450, subd.
(b).)
Plaintiff has not done so. Accordingly, the motion is denied without prejudice.
Conclusion
The Court
DENIES Plaintiff’s motion to compel the deposition of Defendant’s PMQ without
prejudice.
Moving party is ORDERED to give notice.