Case Number: BC666164 Hearing Date: October 17, 2018 Dept: 5

Superior Court of California
County of Los Angeles
Department 5

Shontay Delpit,

Plaintiff,

v.

Donte Bernard Amos, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No.: BC666164

(Related to 17K08149)

Hearing Date: October 17, 2018

[TENTATIVE] order RE:

defendant’s Motion to Compel Non-Party York INSURANCE to Comply with a Deposition Subpoena

Background

This action arises out of a motor vehicle collision that occurred on September 3, 2016. Defendants Los Angeles County Sherriff’s Department and Donte Bernard Amos (“Defendants”) seek to compel the compliance of non-party York Insurance (“York”) with a deposition subpoena. Plaintiff has not filed any opposition to this motion.

Discussion

Code of Civil Procedure § 1987.1 provides that “[i]f a subpoena requires the attendance of a witness or the production of books, documents, electronically stored information, or other things before a court, or at the trial of an issue therein, or at the taking of a deposition, the court, upon motion reasonably made by [a party or a witness] . . . may make an order quashing the subpoena entirely, modifying it, or directing compliance with it upon those terms or conditions as the court shall declare, including protective orders.”

However, Defendants’ motion to compel nonparty York to appear for deposition must be denied for defects in the motion and in the proof of service of this motion.

First, Defendants fail to attach the deposition subpoena purportedly served on York. As such, the Court cannot determine what subpoena Defendants are seeking to enforce nor what specific documents Defendants are seeking to be produced. In addition, the Court cannot evaluate whether the deposition subpoena was properly served on York. Under CCP § 2020.220(b)-(c), a deposition subpoena must be personally served on a non-party deponent. Without the proof of service of the deposition subpoena, the Court cannot evaluate whether the subpoena was properly served, and thus, whether it is enforceable.

Second, Defendants’ motion to compel non-party’s compliance with subpoena must be denied for failure to comply with California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1346. Rule 3.1346 requires that “[a] written notice and all moving papers supporting a motion to compel an answer to a deposition question or to compel production of a document or tangible thing from a nonparty deponent must be personally served on the nonparty deponent unless the nonparty deponent agrees to accept service by mail or electronic service at an address or electronic service address specified on the deposition record.” Based upon Defendants’ proof of service for the instant motion, the non-party was served with this motion via mail rather than by personal service. Therefore, the motion must be denied as it was improperly served on the non-party

//

//

//

Conclusion and Order

Based on the foregoing, Defendants’ Motion to Compel Non-Party York Insurance to Comply with Deposition Subpoena is denied without prejudice. Defendants may bring another motion to enforce subpoenas but must correct the defects noted above in doing so.

Defendants are ordered to provide notice of this order and file proof of service of such.

DATED: October 17, 2018 ___________________________

Elaine Lu

Judge of the Superior Court