Case Number: BC534271 Hearing Date: April 03, 2018 Dept: 92

MARIE T. WALTON,

Plaintiff(s),

vs.

RALPHS GROCERY COMPANY, INC., ET AL.,

Defendant(s).

CASE NO: BC534271

[TENTATIVE] ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S UNOPPOSED MOTIONS TO COMPEL

Dept. 92

1:30 p.m.

April 3, 2018

1. Background Facts

Plaintiff, Marie T. Walton filed this action against Defendants, Ralphs Grocery Company, Inc. and Fletcher’s Floors, Inc. for damages arising out of a slip and fall. On 1/29/18, the Court granted Fletcher’s Floors’s motion for terminating sanctions on Plaintiff’s complaint. However, a cross-complaint remains pending between Fletcher’s and Ralphs, such that Fletcher’s remains an active party in this litigation.

2. Motion to Compel Independent Medical Examination

a. Initial Note

Opposition to this motion was due on or before 3/20/18. CCP §1005(b). The Court has not received any opposition to the motion.

b. Merits

Defendant has propounded four demands for IME on Plaintiff. The most recent Notice was propounded on 12/01/17 with an IME date of 12/31/17. Plaintiff failed to object to the most recent Notice, and failed to appear at the IME.

At this time, Defendant moves to compel Plaintiff’s IME. Defendant seeks to compel the IME per CCP §2032.240. §2032.240 provides that, when a plaintiff fails to respond to a demand, the defendant may move for an order compelling compliance with the request for an exam. Of note, there is no meet and confer requirement in connection with §2032.240. In light of the lack of opposition, the motion is granted.

Plaintiff is ordered to appear for examination on a date and time to be scheduled by Defendant. Defendant must give Plaintiff at least five days’ notice of the scheduled IME; notice is extended per Code if by other than personal service.

The Court notes that Defendant has set forth the proposed scope of the examination, as well as the manner, conditions, and nature of the examination, in the prior notices of IME, to which Plaintiff waived any objection by failing to timely respond. The scope of the examination may not be expanded in connection with the compelled IME.

3. Motion to Compel Deposition

a. Initial Note

As with the motion to compel IME, Plaintiff’s opposition was due on or before 3/20/18, and the Court has not received opposition to the motion to compel deposition.

b. Merits

Defendant has noticed Plaintiff’s deposition on three occasions. Defendant most recently propounded a notice of deposition on 1/09/18, setting Plaintiff’s deposition for 1/25/18. Plaintiff did not object, but she also did not appear. At this time, Defendant seeks an order compelling Plaintiff to attend her deposition and produce documents subject to the document production demand.

The motion to compel is granted. CCP §2025.450(a). Plaintiff is ordered to appear for deposition. Defendant may unilaterally set the deposition with at least five days’ notice to Plaintiff (extended per Code if notice by other than personal service). Defendant’s moving papers adequately show good cause for production of the documents sought, as required by §2025.450(b)(1). Plaintiff is therefore ordered to produce at the deposition those requested documents which are in her custody, possession or control.