Judge: William A. Crowfoot, Case: 21STCV46927, Date: 2024-12-31 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV46927    Hearing Date: December 31, 2024    Dept: 3

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - NORTHEAST DISTRICT

 

PAMELA MILICH,

                    Plaintiff(s),

          vs.

 

ONE HEART CAREGIVERS, et al.,

 

                    Defendant(s).

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

     CASE NO.:  21STCV46927

 

[TENTATIVE] ORDER RE: MOTION TO COMPEL DOCUMENT PRODUCTION IN RESPONSE TO A SUBPOENA

 

Dept. 3

8:30 a.m.

December 31, 2024

 

)

 

 

On November 4, 2024, defendant Caregiver Services & Homecare, Inc. dba 1Heart Caregiver Services (“Defendant”, erroneously sued as “One Heart Caregivers”) filed this motion for an order compelling nonparty Verizon Wireless Services, LLC (“Verizon”) to produce documents in response to a deposition subpoena. The subpoena seeks Plaintiff’s cell phone records for the month of December 2020 in order to corroborate her testimony that she reported Defendant’s employee, Rene Borromeo (“Borromeo”), for touching her “on the hip.” Plaintiff testified that she contacted both 911 and Defendant on December 9, 2020, to report that Borromeo touched her “on the hip.” Whether Plaintiff in fact reported this incident to Defendant is relevant to whether Defendant had notice of Borromeo’s fitness as an employee because this action is premised on the allegation that Plaintiff was sexually assaulted by Borromeo on December 15, 2020.

“The procedure to obtain documents from a nonparty is through a “records only” or “records and testimony” deposition subpoena.” (Monarch Healthcare v. Superior Court (2000) 78 Cal.App.4th 1282, 1287.) Under Code of Civil Procedure section 2020.220(c), personal service of a deposition subpoena “is effective to require . . .[a]ny specific production, inspection, testing, and sampling” by a deponent. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2020.220, subd. (c).) Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1987.1 (a), a party may move for an order “directing compliance [with a subpoena] upon those terms or conditions as the court shall declare.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 1987.1, subd. (a).)

The subpoena was issued to Verizon on September 24, 2024. (Avetisove Decl., ¶ 8.) Plaintiff did not object to the subpoena, but Verizon sent an objection on October 17, 2024. (Id., Ex. E.)

Neither Plaintiff nor Verizon opposed this motion and Defendant has established that the records sought are directly relevant to the underlying action. Accordingly, the motion is GRANTED and Verizon is ordered to produce the requested documents within 20 days of the date of this Order.

Dated this 31st day of December, 2024

 

 

 

 

       William A. Crowfoot

Judge of the Superior Court

 

 

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at ALHDEPT3@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.