Case Number: BC697672 Hearing Date: May 13, 2019 Dept: 3

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES – CENTRAL DISTRICT

EVELYN RAMOS,

Plaintiff(s),

vs.

4688 HUNTINGTON DRIVE, LLC, ET AL.,

Defendant(s).

CASE NO: BC697672

[TENTATIVE] ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR TERMINATING SANCTIONS

Dept. 3

1:30 p.m.

May 13, 2019

On 3/11/19, the Court heard this motion to compel deposition and continued it to 5/10/19. The Court ruled, in pertinent part, as follows:

Defendant indicates it will provide dates for its PMK deposition on or before the hearing on this motion to compel. To the extent Defendant has not done so, the parties are ordered to meet and confer within the next five days to agree on a date for the PMK deposition. The deposition should go forward within thirty days. The hearing on this motion is continued to Friday, 5/10/19 at 1:30 p.m. in Department 3 of the Spring Street Courthouse. If the motion goes forward on 5/10/19, the parties must file any additional briefs, declarations, etc., concerning the status of the depositions at least two weeks prior to the continued hearing date. If the parties resolve the issues relating to the depositions, Plaintiff must immediately use the online reservation system to take the continued hearing date off calendar.

On 4/09/19, Plaintiff filed this motion for terminating sanctions, contending Defendant should be sanctioned for failing to comply with the Court’s 3/11/19 order. On 4/30/19, Defendant timely filed opposition to the motion, correctly noting that the Court’s 3/11/19 order merely required the parties to meet and confer about depositions, and continued the hearing on the actual motion to compel to 5/10/19. There was no order compelling a deposition, and therefore there cannot be a violation of an order upon which to premise a motion for sanctions.

Any reply to the opposition was due on or before 5/06/19. The Court has not received a reply to the opposition. The motion for terminating sanctions is denied.

Defendant seeks sanctions in connection with the opposition. Sanctions are appropriate under CCP §2023.010(h), which permits imposition of sanctions for making an improper discovery motion. Defendant seeks $1690 in sanctions. The Court reduces the amount to $1000. Plaintiff and her attorney of record, jointly and severally, are ordered to pay sanctions to Defendant, by and through counsel of record, in the amount of $1000, within twenty days.

Plaintiff is ordered to give notice.