Judge: Steven A. Ellis, Case: 23STCV08687, Date: 2024-08-23 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 23STCV08687 Hearing Date: August 23, 2024 Dept: 29
Gayles v. City
of Los Angeles
23STCV08687
Motion to Compel Plaintiff to Appear for Deposition.
Motion to Compel Plaintiff to Respond to Form Interrogatories (Set One).
Motion to Compel Plaintiff to Respond to Special Interrogatories (Set One).
Motion to Compel Plaintiff to Respond to Request for Production (Set One).
Tentative
The motions are granted.
The requests for sanctions are granted in
part and denied in part.
Background
On April 19, 2023, Plaintiff Mariah
Allen Gayles (“Plaintiff”) filed her complaint against City of Los Angeles
(“Defendant”) and Does 1 to 20 for premises liability cause of action arising
out of a scooter accident occurring on March 24, 2022.
Defendant filed its answer and a cross-complaint
against Roes 1 through 10 on August 30, 2023.
On March 27, 2024, Plaintiff filed a
substitution of attorney stating that Plaintiff is now representing herself in
pro per.
On June 12, 2024, Defendant filed the
four motions that are before the Court and set for hearing on August 23:
motions to compel Plaintiff to appear for deposition, to compel Plaintiff to
respond to Form Interrogatories (Set One), to compel Plaintiff to respond to Special
Interrogatories (Set One), and to compel Plaintiff to respond to Requests for
Production (Set One).
No opposition has been filed.
The hearings on these motions were
initially set for July 18 and were continued to August 23.
Legal Standard
Party Deposition
“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.” (Id., § 2025.280, subd.
(a).)
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.
Section
2025.450, subdivision (a), provides:
“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.”
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).)
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.” (Id., § 2025.450, subd. (g)(1).)
Interrogatories
A party must respond to interrogatories within 30 days
after service. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.260, subd.(a).) If a party to whom
interrogatories are directed does not provide a timely response, the propounding
party may move for an order compelling response to the interrogatories. (Id.,
§ 2030.290, subd. (b).) There is no time limit for a motion to compel initial
responses, and no meet and confer efforts are required. (See id., § 2030.290;
Sinaiko Healthcare Consulting, Inc. v. Pacific Healthcare Consultants
(2007) 148 Cal.App.4th 390, 411.) Nor must a separate statement be filed. (Cal.
Rules of Court, rule 3.1345(b)(1).) In
addition, a party who fails to provide a timely response generally waives all
objections. (Code Civ. Proc., §
2030.290, subd. (a).)
When a party moves to compel initial responses to
interrogatories, “the court shall impose a monetary sanction under Chapter 7
(commencing with Section 2023.010) against any party, person, or attorney who
unsuccessfully makes or opposes [the motion], unless it 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., § 2030.290, subd.
(c).)
Requests for Production
A party must respond to requests for production of
documents within 30 days after service. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.260,
subd.(a).) If a party to whom requests for production of documents are directed
does not provide timely responses, the requesting party may move for an order
compelling response to the demand. (Id., § 2031.300, subd. (b).) There
is no time limit for a motion to compel initial responses, and no meet and
confer efforts are required. (See id., § 2031.300; Sinaiko Healthcare
Consulting, Inc. v. Pacific Healthcare Consultants (2007) 148 Cal.App.4th
390, 411.) Nor must a separate statement be filed. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule
3.1345(b)(1).) In addition, a party who
fails to provide a timely response generally waives all objections. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.300, subd. (a).)
When
a party moves to compel initial responses to requests for production, “the
court shall impose a monetary sanction under Chapter 7 (commencing with Section
2023.010) against any party, person, or attorney who unsuccessfully makes or
opposes [the motion], unless it 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., § 2031.300, subd. (c).)
In Chapter 7 of the Civil Discovery
Act, Code of Civil Procedure 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.,
§ 2023.020, subd. (a).)
Discussion
Motion to Compel Deposition of
Plaintiff
Defendant
served Plaintiff with notice of deposition on March 5, 2024 for deposition set
for May 6, 2024. (Jung Decl., ¶ 2.) Plaintiff
did not serve objections to the May 6 deposition and failed to appear
for the deposition. (Id., ¶ 4.) Defendant reached out to Plaintiff by
mail on May 15 to inquire about the non-appearance, but Plaintiff did not respond.
(Id., ¶¶ 5, 6.)
The
Court finds Plaintiff was properly served with notice of the deposition and
failed to appear. All substantive and
procedural requirements are satisfied.
Therefore,
the Court GRANTS Defendant’s motion to compel Plaintiff’s appearance for
deposition.
As for
sanctions, the Court finds that it is granting the motion to compel, that
Plaintiff’s conduct is not substantially justified, and that the imposition of
sanctions would not be unjust. The Court
GRANTS the request for sanctions in part.
(Code Civ. Proc., § 2025.450, subd. (g)(1).) In light
of the straightforward nature of this motion, the Court sets sanctions in the
amount of $600, based on two hours of attorney time multiplied by a reasonable
billing rate of $300 per hour for work of this nature. (See Jung Decl., ¶ 10.)
Motions to Compel Written Discovery
On March 5, 2024, Defendant served Plaintiff with
discovery including Form Interrogatories, Special Interrogatories, and Request
for Production. (Jung Decls., ¶ 2 & Exhs. A.) Plaintiff has not responded. (Id., ¶ 6.)
Defendant need not show anything more. The motions to compel Plaintiff to respond to
the Form Interrogatories, Special Interrogatories, and the Request for Production
are GRANTED.
The requests for sanctions in connection with the
motions to compel responses to the interrogatories and requests for production are
DENIED.
Code of Civil Procedure section 2023.010,
subdivision (d), defines “[m]isuses of the discovery process” to include
“[f]ailing to respond or to submit to an authorized method of discovery” but
does not independently authorize sanctions for such conduct.
Code of Civil Procedure section 2023.030 provides
for the imposition of sanctions against any party or attorney who engages in
conduct that is a misuse of the discovery process “[t]o the extent authorized
by the chapter governing any particular discovery method or any other provision
of this title [the Civil Discovery Act].”
This section, itself, does not independently authorize sanctions.
In the chapters of the Civil Discovery Act governing
interrogatories and requests for production, the Legislature has authorized
sanctions in the context of a motion to compel initial responses “against any party, person, or
attorney who unsuccessfully makes or opposes” the motion to compel. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.290, subd. (c) &
2031.300, subd. (c).) Here, however, Plaintiff
has not opposed the motions.
Accordingly, no sanctions are authorized.
Conclusion
The Court GRANTS Defendant’s motion to compel the deposition
of Plaintiff.
The Court ORDERS Plaintiff to appear for deposition and answer
questions under oath on September __, 2024, at 10:00 am, by remote video technology. Defendant is ordered to provide Plaintiff
with the link for the deposition at least 48 hours in advance.
The Court GRANTS IN PART Defendant’s request for monetary
sanctions in connection with the deposition motion.
The Court ORDERS Plaintiff to pay $600 in sanctions under the
Civil Discovery Act to Defendant within 30 days of notice.
The Court GRANTS the Motions to Compel Plaintiff Mariah Allen
Gayles to Respond to Form Interrogatories (Set One), Request for Production
(Set One), and Motion to Compel Plaintiff Mariah Allen Gayles’ Appearance for
Deposition.
The Court ORDERS Plaintiff to serve code compliant, written,
verified responses, without objection, to Defendant’s Form Interrogatories (Set
One) within 14 days of notice.
The Court ORDERS Plaintiff to serve code compliant, written,
verified responses, without objection, to Defendant’s Special Interrogatories (Set
One) within 14 days of notice.
The Court ORDERS Plaintiff to serve code compliant, written,
verified responses, without objection, to Defendant’s Requests for Production (Set
One) within 14 days of notice.
The Court DENIES Defendant’s requests for sanctions in
connection with the written discovery motions.
Moving party is ORDERED to give notice.