Case Number: BC651726 Hearing Date: August 08, 2018 Dept: 2

Motion by Defendant, Red Line Courier Service, to Compel Plaintiff’s Authorization for Verizon Wireless’ Release of Cell Phone Records; Request for Sanctions, filed on 7/9/18 is DENIED.

Defendant has not cited any authority that gives the Court discretion to require Plaintiff to sign an authorization for the release of Plaintiff’s cell phone records. If Plaintiff failed to sufficiently respond to a document request for production of the cell phone records, Defendant’s remedy was to file a motion to compel further responses after an informal discovery conference took place.

California courts have declined to permit discovery not authorized by the Legislature in the Discovery Act. Thus, in Edmiston v. Superior Court (1978) 22 Cal.3d 699, 704, the court declined to permit videotaping of a medical examination, holding it was not affirmatively authorized by the Legislature, and whether it was permissible was an issue for the Legislature to determine. Edmiston v. Superior Court (1978) 22 Cal.3d 699, 704.

The court does not have the power to create methods of discovery not based on a reasonable interpretation of statutory provisions. Holm v. Superior Court (1986) 187 Cal.App.3d 1241, 1247.

Moving party is ordered to give notice.