Judge: Virginia Keeny, Case: 24STCP00039, Date: 2025-04-02 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24STCP00039    Hearing Date: April 2, 2025    Dept: 45

TIERRA HOLDINGS, LLC, et al. vs G2K HOLDINGS, LLC, et al.

petitioner/judgment creditor fem ventures, llc’s motion to compel compliance with subpoena to monica gonzalez and request for MONETARY SANCTIONS in the amount of $1,750 against judgment debtor monica gonzalez

Date of Hearing:        April 2, 2025                                                   Trial Date:       July 23, 2025

Department:              45                                                                    Case No.:        24STCP00039

Moving Party:            Petitioner Fem Ventures LLC

Responding Party:     No opposition

Meet and Confer:      Yes. (Kearney Decl. ¶6.)

BACKGROUND

On December 21, 2023, Arbitrator Kathy Vogdes, Esq. (the “Arbitrator”) issued an arbitration award (the “Award”) in the amount of $3,147,389.44 for Petitioners Tierra Holding LLC, FEM Ventures LLC, and QBN Capital, LLC (collectively “Petitioners”) and against Respondents G2K Holdings, LLC, Eugenio A. Gonzalez, Robert Knohl, and Monica Gonzalez, (collectively “Respondents”).

On January 5, 2024, Petitioners filed the instant Petition to Confirm Arbitration Award (“Petition”) against Respondents. On June 5, Petitioners obtained a judgment from this Court against Respondents G2K Holdings, LLC, Eugenio Gonzalez, Monica Gonzalez, and Robert Knohl, jointly and severally, in the total sum of $3,279,720.93.  

[Tentative] Ruling

Petitioner/Judgment Creditor FEM Ventures, LLC’s Motion to Compel Compliance with Subpoena to Monica Gonzalez and Request for Monetary Sanctions in the Amount of $1,750 Against Judgment Debtor Monica Gonzalez is GRANTED.

discussion

Petitioner FEM Ventures, LLC moves to compel compliance with the subpoena of Monica Gonzalez[1] and requests monetary sanctions in the amount of $1,750.00 against Judgment Debtor Monica Gonzalez on the grounds Ms. Gonzalez was personally served with a subpoena to produce documents, but did not produce any of the subpoenaed documents. This motion is unopposed.

Two provisions in the Code of Civil Procedure govern motions to compel responses to deposition subpoenas. Code of Civil Procedure section 1987.1 provides that “[i]f 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 [a party or a witness] . . . 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.”  

Code of Civil Procedure section 2025.480(a) similarly provides that “[i]f a deponent fails to answer any question or to produce any document, electronically stored information,¿or tangible thing under the deponent's control that is specified in the deposition notice or a deposition subpoena, the party seeking discovery may move the court for an order compelling that answer or production.” Unlike Code of Civil Procedure section 1987.1, Section 2025.480 also includes a time limit (“[t]his motion shall be made no later than 60 days after the completion of the record of the deposition”) and a meet and confer requirement (“[t]his motion . . . shall be accompanied by a meet and confer declaration under Section 2016.040”). (CCP § 2025.480(b).) Sanctions are available under both Sections 1987.2 and CCP § 2025.480(j).

On September 30, 2024, Petitioner/Judgment Creditor served a subpoena for production of documents on Judgment Debtor Monica Gonzalez. (Kearney Decl. ¶5, Exh. B.) The subpoena required Mrs. Gonzalez to produce the subpoenaed documents by October 17, 2024. (Kearney Decl. ¶5, Exh. B.) After the deadline passed, on October 28, 2024, FEM’s counsel reached out to Mr. and Mrs. Gonzalez. (Kearny Decl. ¶6, Exh. C.) Mr. Gonzalez responded that they will have their attorney reach out but no attorney has ever reached out. Mrs. Gonzalez never produced any responsive documents to the subpoena. (Kearny Decl. ¶6, Exh. C.)

Mrs. Gonzalez failed to produce the requested documents despite the deposition subpoena requiring production of the documents. As a result, Petitioner/Judgment Creditor’s Motion to Compel Compliance with Subpoena is GRANTED.

With respect to sanctions, the court finds sanctions warranted. The motion was unopposed and Mrs. Gonzalez has not given substantial justification for failure to comply. The court awards monetary sanctions in the reduced amount of $1,400.00 against Mrs. Gonzalez.