Case Number: BC700339 Hearing Date: October 15, 2019 Dept: 3

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES – CENTRAL DISTRICT

GLORIA QUEVEDO,

Plaintiff(s),

vs.

CITY OF LOS ANGELES, et al.,

Defendant(s).

Case No.: BC700339

[TENTATIVE] ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO COMPEL DEPOSITION; DENYING MOTION TO COMPEL PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS AT DEPOSITION

Dept. 3

1:30 p.m.

October 15, 2019

Plaintiff has noticed the deposition of the City’s PMK on two occasions. Defendant did not serve objections to either notice of deposition, but indicated an inability to appear on the eve of the deposition each time. At this time, Plaintiff moves to compel Defendant’s PMK’s deposition, to compel production of documents at deposition, and to recover sanctions.

The motion to compel is granted. CCP §2025.450(a) requires the Court to grant a motion to compel deposition unless the deponent has served a valid objection to the notice of deposition. Defendant did not object to either notice of deposition, but did not appear. Of note, any opposition to the motion was due on or before 10/01/19. The Court has not received opposition to the motion.

Plaintiff’s attorney and Defendant’s attorney must meet and confer forthwith to set Defendant’s PMK’s deposition. The deposition must go forward within twenty days. If Defense Counsel does not meaningfully participate in the meet and confer process, Plaintiff’s attorney may set the deposition on Plaintiff’s attorney’s terms with ten days’ notice to Defendant (notice extended per Code if by other than personal service).

The Court notes that the notice of deposition includes a demand for production of documents, and Plaintiff seeks an order compelling Defendant to produce all identified documents at her deposition. The moving papers fail to show good cause for production of the documents sought, as required by §2025.450(b)(1). There is a separate statement with the motion that purports to address the documents to be produced. The statement, however, merely lists the categories for the PMK deposition, indicates there was no opposition, and concludes the deposition should go forward. There is no mention of the 37 categories of documents to be produced, and certainly no showing of good cause concerning each category. The motion to compel Defendant to produce documents is therefore denied; the Court encourages the parties to work together to resolve any issues relating to document production without further law and motion practice.

Plaintiff seeks sanctions against Defendant in the amount of $1310. Sanctions are mandatory. §2025.450(c). The Court awards two hours to prepare this form discovery motion, which is slightly more complicated than a typical motion. No opposition was filed and therefore no reply was necessary. No time for appearance is requested. The Court also awards the $60 filing fee. The Court therefore awards a total of two hours of attorney time at the requested rate of $250/hour, or $500 in attorneys’ fees. The Court also awards the $60 filing fee.

Sanctions are sought and imposed against Defendant and its attorney of record, jointly and severally. They are ordered to pay sanctions to Plaintiff, by and through her attorney of record, in the total amount of $560, within twenty days.

Plaintiff is ordered to give notice.