MELGAR DE ERAZO vs WALMART, INC., et al.

25CV013534: MELGAR DE ERAZO vs WALMART, INC., et al. 04/08/2026 Hearing on Motion to Quash Two Subpoenas and for Protective Order in Department 25

Tentative Ruling

NOTICE:

Consistent with Local Rule 1.06(B), any party requesting oral argument on any matter on this calendar must comply with the following procedure:

To request limited oral argument, on any matter on this calendar, you must call the Law and Motion Oral Argument Request Line at (916) 874-2615 by 4:00 p.m. the Court day before the hearing and advise opposing counsel. At the time of requesting oral argument, the requesting party shall leave a voice mail message: a) identifying themselves as the party requesting oral argument; b) indicating the specific matter/motion for which they are requesting oral argument; and c) confirming that it has notified the opposing party of its intention to appear and that opposing party may appear via Zoom using the Zoom link and Meeting ID indicated below. If no request for oral argument is made, the tentative ruling becomes the final order of the Court.

Unless ordered to appear in person by the Court, parties may appear remotely either telephonically or by video conference via the Zoom video/audio conference platform with notice to the Court and all other parties in accordance with Code of Civil Procedure §367.75. Although remote participation is not required, the Court will presume all parties are appearing remotely for non-evidentiary civil hearings.

The Department 25 Zoom Link is https://saccourt-ca-gov.zoomgov.com/my/sscdept25 and the Zoom Meeting ID is 161 1342 1868. To appear on Zoom telephonically, call (833) 568-8864 and enter the Zoom Meeting ID referenced above. NO COURTCALL APPEARANCES WILL BE ACCEPTED.

Parties requesting services of a court reporter will need to arrange for private court reporter services at their own expense, pursuant to Government code §68086 and California Rules of Court, Rule 2.956. Requirements for requesting a court reporter are listed in the Policy for Official Reporter Pro Tempore available on the Sacramento Superior Court website at https://www.saccourt.ca.gov/court-reporters/docs/crtrp-6a.pdf. Parties may contact Court- Approved Official Reporters Pro Tempore by utilizing the list of Court Approved Official Reporters Pro Tempore available at https://www.saccourt.ca.gov/court-reporters/docs/crtrp- 13.pdf.

A Stipulation and Appointment of Official Reporter Pro Tempore (CV/E-206) is required to be signed by each party, the private court reporter, and the Judge prior to the hearing, if not using a reporter from the Court’s Approved Official Reporter Pro Tempore list.

Once the form is signed it must be filed with the clerk. If a litigant has been granted a fee waiver

25CV013534: MELGAR DE ERAZO vs WALMART, INC., et al. 04/08/2026 Hearing on Motion to Quash Two Subpoenas and for Protective Order in Department 25

and requests a court reporter, the party must submit a Request for Court Reporter by a Party with a Fee Waiver (CV/E-211) and it must be filed with the clerk at least 10 days prior to the hearing or at the time the proceeding is scheduled if less than 10 days away. Once approved, the clerk will forward the form to the Court Reporter’s Office and an official reporter will be provided.

****NOTICE: EFFECTIVE APRIL 13, 2026, THIS DEPARTMENT WILL MOVE TO THE TANI G. CANTIL-SAKAUYE COURTHOUSE LOCATED AT 500 G. ST. SACRAMENTO, CA. MOTIONS NOTICED FOR DEPARTMENT 25 WILL BE HEARD IN DEPARTMENT 8D OF THE NEW COURTHOUSE. ALL HEARINGS WILL TAKE PLACE AT THIS NEW LOCATION*****

TENTATIVE RULING

Plaintiff’s Notice of Motion does not provide notice of the Court’s tentative ruling system, as required by Local Rule 1.06(D). Plaintiff’s counsel is directed to contact opposing counsel forthwith to advise counsel of Local Rule 1.06 and the Court’s tentative ruling procedure. If Plaintiff’s counsel is unable to contact opposing counsel prior to the hearing, Plaintiff’s counsel shall be available at the hearing, in person or remotely (telephonically or by video conference via Zoom as stated in the introductory notice to today’s tentative rulings), in the event opposing counsel appears without following the procedures set forth in Local Rule 1.06(B).

Counsel for Plaintiff Ana M. Melgar de Erazo’s (“Plaintiff”) and Defendant Walmart, Inc. (“Defendant”) are ordered to appear in Court on April 15, 2026 at 1:30 p.m. in Department 25 located at Gordon D. Schaber Sacramento County Courthouse at 720 9th St, Sacramento, CA 95814 to engage in an informal discovery conference.

In resuming the meet-and-confer process, the parties should be guided by the observation(s) that: (1) the motion is not rendered moot by the withdrawal of the subpoenas. Code of Civil Procedure section 1005.5 specifically provides that a motion is deemed made at the time it is filed and served; (2) while Plaintiff has placed her medical condition at issue by bringing the instant action, Defendant is not entitled to her entire medical record. However, Defendant is entitled to certain unredacted medical records; (3) the fact that Plaintiff has already produced redacted versions of her medical records that she finds to be “directly relevant” to the action has no bearing upon whether the Court would grant a motion to quash.

The Court, not Plaintiff’s counsel, makes determination as to whether certain records are relevant; (4) many of Defendant’s arguments concern matters that are not properly before the Court (Plaintiff’s lack of a

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO

25CV013534: MELGAR DE ERAZO vs WALMART, INC., et al. 04/08/2026 Hearing on Motion to Quash Two Subpoenas and for Protective Order in Department 25

privilege log, Plaintiff’s handling of requests for admission); (5) the parties’ meet-andconfer efforts to date have not been made in a meaningful, good faith attempt to resolve the discovery issues raised in this motion; (6) any sanctions that are awarded will take into consideration the entirely insufficient meet-and-confer communications by the parties prior to Plaintiff bringing the instant motion; and (7) the proposed order submitted by Plaintiff is seeks improper relief, which would result in prejudice to Defendant.

On the Court's own motion, the Hearing on Motion to Quash Two Subpoenas and for Protective Order scheduled for 04/08/2026 is continued to 04/15/2026 at 01:30 PM in Department 25 at Gordon D. Schaber Superior Court.