Judge: William A. Crowfoot, Case: 20STCV47503, Date: 2022-10-18 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 20STCV47503    Hearing Date: October 18, 2022    Dept: 27

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

 

JACKIE L. NUTTING,

                   Plaintiff(s),

          vs.

 

ALEXANDER KHAZAI, et al.,

 

                   Defendant(s).

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

      CASE NO.: 20STCV47503

 

 

[TENTATIVE] ORDER RE: DEFENDANT ALEXANDER KHAZAI’S MOTION TO QUASH OR MODIFY DEPOSITION SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM SERVED ON MISSION COMMUNITY HOSPITAL AND REQUEST FOR MONETARY SANCTIONS

 

Dept. 27

1:30 p.m.

October 18, 2022

         

On December 11, 2020, plaintiff Jackie L. Nutting (“Plaintiff’) filed this action against defendant Alexander Khazai (“Defendant”), Nahid Jahanbin (“Jahanbin”), and Mansour Khazai (“Khazazi”) arising from a December 13, 2018 motor vehicle collision.  Plaintiff alleges Defendant negligently operated a motor vehicle that was owned and entrusted by Jahanbin and Khazai. 

On May 3, 2021, Defendant, Jahanbin, and Khazai filed a cross-complaint against Plaintiff.  On June 2, 2021, a First Amended Cross-Complaint was filed, alleging that Plaintiff caused the accident by making an unsafe lane change and applying her brakes. 

On September 22, 2022, Defendant filed this motion to modify or quash the deposition subpoena served on Community Hospital.  Defendant also requests sanctions against Plaintiff and her attorneys of record, Law Offices of Richardson, Fair, & Cohen in the amount of $1,015. 

A deposition subpoena may request (1) only the attendance and testimony of a deponent, (2) only the production of business records for copying, or (3) the attendance and testimony, as well as the production of business records.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 2020.020.)  The court, upon motion or the court’s own motion, “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.  In addition, the court may make any other orders as may be appropriate to protect the person from unreasonable or oppressive demands, including unreasonable violations of the right of privacy of the person.”  (Code Civ. Proc., § 1987.1, subd. (a).)  “A deposition subpoena that commands only the production of business records for copying shall designate the business records to be produced either by specifically describing each individual item or by reasonably particularizing each category of item . . .”  (Code Civ. Proc., §2020.410, subd. (a).)

Defendant argues that Plaintiff’s subpoena is overbroad because it seeks records from the ten years prior to the incident and does not limit production of records by any specific body part at issue in this matter.  The motion fails to include a copy of the deposition subpoena at issue.  The hearing on the motion to quash is therefore CONTINUED to November 18, 2022 at 1:30 p.m. in Department 27 in the Spring Street Courthouse. 

 

Moving party to give notice.

 

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at SSCDEPT27@lacourt.org indicating intention to submit on the tentative as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org.  Please be advised that 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 matter.  Unless you receive a submission from all other parties in the matter, you should assume that others might appear at the hearing to argue.  If the Court does not receive emails from the parties indicating submission on this tentative ruling and there are no appearances at the hearing, the Court may, at its discretion, adopt the tentative as the final order or place the motion off calendar.