Motion to Compel Deposition and Production of Documents
34-2022-00326363-CU-PO-GDS: Diana Wallace vs. Richard Anders 12/19/2023 Hearing on Motion to Compel Deposition and Production of Documents in Department 53
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 53/54 Zoom Link is https://saccourt-cagov.zoomgov.com/my/sscdept53.54 and the Zoom Meeting ID is 161 4650 6749. 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
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”
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 Courts 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 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
34-2022-00326363-CU-PO-GDS: Diana Wallace vs. Richard Anders 12/19/2023 Hearing on Motion to Compel Deposition and Production of Documents in Department 53
or at the time the proceeding is scheduled if less than 10 days away. Once approved, the clerk will be forward the form to the Court Reporters Office and an official reporter will be provided.
TENTATIVE RULING
The motion of Plaintiffs Diana Wallace and Brandon Hughes (Plaintiffs) to compel Defendant in pro per Scott D. Mackenroth (Defendant) to attend a deposition is UNOPPOSED and GRANTED.
The service of a deposition notice under Section 2025.240 is effective to require any deponent who is a party to the action . . . to attend and to testify, as well as to produce any document, electronically stored information, or tangible thing for inspection and copying. (Code Civ. Proc. § 2025.280(a).) If, after service of a deposition notice, a party . . ., 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, electronically stored information, or tangible thing described in the deposition notice, the party giving the notice may move for an order compelling the deponents attendance and testimony, and the production for inspection of any document, electronically stored information, or tangible thing described in the deposition notice. (Code Civ.
Proc. § 2025.450(a).) 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. (Code Civ. Proc. § 2025.450(g)(1).)
On August 3, 2023, Plaintiffs served a Notice of Deposition, scheduling Defendants deposition for September 6, 2023. (Helm Decl., ¶ 2, Exh. A.) Defendant did not object to the notice. (Id., ¶ 4.) On September 5, 2023, Plaintiffs counsel called Defendant and left a voicemail to confirm his attendance at the deposition. (Id., ¶ 3.) Defendant failed to appear. (Id., ¶ 4.) On September 14, 2023, Counsel sent a meet and confer letter to Defendant to discuss the failure to appear. (Id., ¶ 7.) Defendant did not respond. (Ibid.) Accordingly, Plaintiffs filed the instant motion to compel Defendants deposition and for monetary sanctions. Plaintiffs indicate they incurred $491.10 in expenses for the court reporter, and 2 hours of attorney time at a rate of $350/hour to bring the instant motion. Plaintiffs therefore request $1,191.10 in monetary sanctions.
Defendant did not file an opposition. The Court treats the failure to oppose the motion as a concession on the merits. (D.I. Chadbourne, Inc. v. Superior Court (1964) 60 Cal.2d 723, 728, n. 4.)
The motion is granted. Defendant shall appear for a deposition on December 29, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. at the Law Offices of Eason & Tamborinini, 1234 H. Street, Sacramento, CA 95814, unless
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO
34-2022-00326363-CU-PO-GDS: Diana Wallace vs. Richard Anders 12/19/2023 Hearing on Motion to Compel Deposition and Production of Documents in Department 53
the parties mutually agree to an alternative date or location. Defendant shall produce all documents responsive to the requests in the original notice of deposition.
The Court awards Plaintiffs reasonable monetary sanctions in the amount of $1,016.10. The sanctions shall be paid no later than 01/19/2024. If the sanctions have not been paid by that date, Defendant may prepare a formal order granting the sanctions, which may then be enforced as a separate judgment. (Newland v. Superior Court (1995) 45 Cal.App.4th 608, 615.)
The minute order is effective immediately. No formal order pursuant to CRC Rule 3.1312 is required. Plaintiffs shall promptly serve notice of this minute order to Defendant.