HAMMLER vs ALLISON, et al.

23CV006784: HAMMLER vs ALLISON, et al. 11/12/2025 Hearing on Motion - Other to Depose Prisoner in Department 28

Tentative Ruling

NOTICE:

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that any oral arguments regarding this tentative ruling will be heard at 1:30 pm in Department 28, located at 720 9th Street, Sacramento, CA, the Hon. Richard C. Miadich presiding.

Any party who wishes to contest the tentative ruling below must:

(1) request a hearing by calling the Law and Motion Oral Argument Request Line at (916) 874-2615, by 4:00 p.m. the Court day before the noticed hearing date, and leave a voicemail 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 they have notified the opposing party of their intention to appear; and

(2) advise the opposing party of the location and time of hearing pursuant to Local Rule 1.06.

If a hearing is not requested by 4:00 p.m. on the Court day before the noticed hearing date, the tentative ruling will become the final order of the Court.

If a hearing is requested, the Court prefers in-person attendance by the parties. However, parties may appear by Zoom unless the Court specifically orders in-person attendance. Parties choosing to appear by Zoom are reminded, however, that a Zoom appearance is still a formal appearance before the Court. Parties appearing via Zoom should do so from a quiet location, free from undue distractions, and wear attire suitable for an in-person court appearance.

The parties may join the Zoom session for hearing on the tentative ruling by audio and/or video through the following link:

https://saccourt-ca-gov.zoomgov.com/my/sscdept28

SIP Address:

16039062174@sip.zoomgov.com

(833) 568-8864

23CV006784: HAMMLER vs ALLISON, et al. 11/12/2025 Hearing on Motion - Other to Depose Prisoner in Department 28

ID: 16039062174

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 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 be forward the form to the Court Reporter’s Office and an official reporter will be provided.

TENTATIVE RULING:

The Court has adopted the following procedure for hearings in Department 28 for self-represented incarcerated parties.

The clerk shall fax a copy of the tentative ruling to the litigation coordinator on or before the date of the scheduled hearing. The litigation coordinator shall provide the tentative ruling to Plaintiff Allen Hammler within 48 hours of receiving it.

The hearing date shall automatically be continued three weeks for oral argument. The continuance date will always be an appearance required hearing so that Plaintiff Allen Hammler need not request oral argument.

The Litigation Coordinator shall make Plaintiff Allen Hammler available, by Zoom or telephonically, at 1:30 p.m. on the date of the continued hearing date, which

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO

23CV006784: HAMMLER vs ALLISON, et al. 11/12/2025 Hearing on Motion - Other to Depose Prisoner in Department 28

will December 3, 2025, to participate in oral argument.

To appear on Zoom telephonically, call (833) 568-8864 and enter the Zoom ID: 16039062174

Defendants Kathleen Allison et al.’s (“Defendants”) motion to take the deposition of currently incarcerated in pro per Plaintiff Allen Hammler (“Plaintiff”) pursuant to Penal Code section 2623 is UNOPPOSED and GRANTED.

In this personal injury action, Plaintiff alleges that he was injured by Defendants while incarcerated. Plaintiff alleges causes of action for assault, battery, and negligent supervision. Defendants now move for an order to permit them to take Plaintiff’s deposition to gain information and evidence regarding his claims pursuant to Penal Code section 2623.

Penal Code section 2623 states:

If in a civil action or special proceeding a witness be a prisoner, confined in a state prison within this state, an order for the prisoner’s examination in the prison by deposition may be made.

1. By the court itself in which the action or special proceeding is pending, unless it be a small claims court.

2. By a judge of the superior court of the county where the action or proceeding is pending, if pending before a small claims court or before a judge or other person out of court.

Such order can only be made on the motion of a party, upon affidavit showing the nature of the action or proceeding, the testimony expected from the witness, and its materiality. The deposition, when ordered, shall be taken in accordance with Section 2622.

(Pen. Code, § 2623.)

In support of the motion, Defendants provide a declaration from counsel, Mr. Wilson, setting forth that Plaintiff’s testimony will “will likely include information on the specific actions of the defendants that Hammler claims harmed him, the identity of witnesses to the events giving rise to the lawsuit, and injuries Hammler claims to have suffered.” (Declaration of Matthew Wilson, ¶ 3.) Mr. Wilson further declares, “This evidence will be

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO

23CV006784: HAMMLER vs ALLISON, et al. 11/12/2025 Hearing on Motion - Other to Depose Prisoner in Department 28

vital in determining whether there are grounds for summary judgment motions on behalf of any of the many defendants in this case and will be necessary should this case proceed to trial.” (Ibid.) The Court concludes that Defendant’s motion and supporting declaration are sufficient to satisfy the prerequisites for an order permitting the deposition of Plaintiff, as they show the nature of the action, expected testimony, and materiality. Additionally, the Court notes that Plaintiff is a party to the action, and thus his testimony is essential.

Finally, the motion is unopposed, which the Court construes as a concession on the merits. (See D.I. Chadbourne, Inc. v. Superior Court (1964) 60 Cal.2d 723, 728, n.4.)

Accordingly, Defendants’ motion to take Plaintiff’s deposition pursuant to Penal Code 2623 is GRANTED. In taking this deposition, the parties shall coordinate with the facility at which Plaintiff is incarcerated and shall comply with such facility’s protocols.

This minute order is effective immediately. No formal order or other notice is required. (Code Civ. Proc. §1019.5; Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1312.)