Judge: Steven A. Ellis, Case: 23STCV20665, Date: 2025-05-19 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 23STCV20665 Hearing Date: May 19, 2025 Dept: 29
Akopian v. Yamashiro, LLC
23STCV20665
Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel the Deposition of Defendant Cedar Restaurant Group
Tentative
The
motion is denied as moot.
Background
On August
29, 2023, Margarit Akopian (“Plaintiff”) filed a complaint against Yamashiro,
LLC and Does 1 through 10 for premises
liability and general negligence arising out of an alleged slip and fall on October
4, 2021.
On
December 20, 2023, default was entered against Yamashiro, LLC. On June 11, 2024, the default was set aside.
On June
13, 2024, Cedar Restaurant Group, LLC dba Yamashiro Hollywood (erroneously sued
as Yamashiro, LLC) (“Defendant”) filed an answer.
On April
18, 2025, Plaintiff filed this motion to compel the deposition of Defendant’s
person most qualified. Plaintiff also
seeks sanctions.
Defendant
filed an opposition on May 6.
No reply
has been filed.
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 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. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2025.410, subd. (a).)
Section
2025.450 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.”
(Code
Civ. Proc., § 2025.450, subd. (a).) The
motion must be accompanied by a meet and confer declaration under Code of Civil
Procedure section 2016.040, “or, when the deponent fails to attend the
deposition and produce the documents … by a declaration stating that the
petitioner has contacted the deponent to inquire about the nonappearance.” (Id., subd. (b)(2).) The motion must also “set forth specific
facts showing cause” for the production of documents. (Id., subd. (b)(1).)
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
seeks an order compelling the appearance of Defendant’s person most qualified (“PMQ”)
for deposition.
On September
19, 2024, Plaintiff noticed Defendant’s deposition for November 21, 2024. (Baker
Decl. ¶ 5; Exh. 1.) Defendant served objections. (Id.; Exh. 2.) On
December 16, 2024, Plaintiff noticed the deposition for January 6, 2025. (Id.,
¶ 6; Exh. 3.) Defendant served objections. (Id.; Exh. 4.) The deposition
was re-noticed for February 4, 2025 based on Defendant’s availability;
Defendant canceled the deposition again. (Id. ¶¶ 7, 8; Exh. 5.)
Defendant provided availability for March 4, 2025; Plaintiff noticed the
deposition for that date. (Id. ¶ 8; Exh. 6.) Defendant failed to appear
for the March 4 deposition, and a certificate of nonappearance was taken. (Id.
¶ 8; Exh. 7.) Deposition was set again on March 27, 2025, but again, Defendant
canceled the deposition. (Id. ¶¶ 9, 10.) A certificate of nonappearance
was taken. (Exh. 10.)
On May
6, 2025, while this motion was pending, Defendant produced its PMQ for
deposition. (Custurea Decl. ¶ 13.) Therefore, this motion is moot.
As the
motion is denied (as moot), the request for sanctions is denied. The applicable statute authorizes sanctions when
“a motion … is granted.” (Code
Civ. Proc., § 2025.450, subd. (g)(1).)
Conclusion
The Court DENIES AS MOOT Plaintiff Margarit Akopian’s
motion to compel the deposition of Defendant Cedar Restaurant Group, LLC.
The
Court DENIES Plaintiff’s request for sanctions.
Moving party is
ORDERED to give notice.