Case Number: KC068184 Hearing Date: April 03, 2018 Dept: O

Huang, et al. v. Ho, et al. (KC068184)

Plaintiff PA One, LLC (and Defendant Ho, by joinder)’s MOTION TO COMPEL DEPOSITION OF DEFENDANT VANESSA VAN HOLLAND

Respondent: NO OPPOSITION

TENTATIVE RULING

Plaintiff PA One, LLC (and Defendant Ho, by joinder)’s motion to compel deposition of defendant Vanessa Van Holland is GRANTED. Van Holland is ordered to appear at the next notice deposition. Sanctions in the sum of $2,185.00 are imposed against Van Holland, payable to Plaintiffs within 30 days.

Plaintiff PA One, LLC (and Defendant Ho, by joinder) moves to compel Vanessa Van Holland’s deposition pursuant to CCP 2025.450.

If, after service of a deposition notice, a party to the action or an officer, director, managing agent, or employee of a party, or a person designated by an organization that is a party under Section 2025.230, without having served a valid objection under Section 2025.410, fails to appear for examination, or to proceed with it, or to produce for inspection any document or tangible thing described in the deposition notice, the party giving the notice may move for an order compelling the deponent’s attendance and testimony, and the production for inspection of any document or tangible thing described in the deposition notice. (CCP 2025.450(a).) The motion shall set forth specific facts showing good cause justifying the production for inspection of any document or tangible thing described in the deposition notice; and shall be accompanied by a meet and confer declaration under Section 2016.040, or, when the deponent fails to attend the deposition and produce the documents or things described in the deposition notice, by a declaration stating that the petitioner has contacted the deponent to inquire about the nonappearance. (CCP 2025.450(b).)

Good cause exists to compel Van Holland’s deposition because her signature appears on various investment contracts that Liberty Asset Management Company, Inc. purportedly made with various LLCs for the investment of Plaintiffs’ funds in commercial property in northern California. Plaintiff has noticed Van Holland’s deposition, but Van Holland has refused, despite Plaintiff’s attempt to provide reasonable accommodations.

Motion is GRANTED. Van Holland is ordered to appear at the next notice deposition.

SANCTIONS:

If a motion under subdivision (a) is granted, the court shall impose a monetary sanction under Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 2023.010) in favor of the party who noticed the deposition and against the deponent or the party with whom the deponent is affiliated, unless the court finds that the one subject to the sanction acted with substantial justification or that other circumstances make the imposition of the sanction unjust. (CCP 2025.450(c)(1). See also 2025.480 for non-party)

Here, sanctions are warranted because Van Holland failed to appear at deposition, and failed to assert any valid grounds excusing her failure to appear. The court finds Plaintiff’s request of $2,185.00 is reasonable. Sanctions in the sum of $2,185.00 are imposed against Van Holland, payable to Plaintiffs within 30 days.