Deen v. Culver City et al.

Accordingly, the Court adopts its tentative ruling of July 6, 2026, and grants Oakhurst's motion for attorneys' fees in the amount of $17,182.50, plus $911 in costs. The remaining fees sought by Oakhurst are denied without prejudice and can be requested once the Briarcliff action has been resolved.

Ruling Deen v. Culver City et al., Case No. 24SMCV06111 Hearing date August 20, 2026 Defendant Culver City's Motion to Compel Compliance with Deposition Subpoena for Business Records to Nonparty Deen & Company CPA

Background Plaintiff Susan Deen (Plaintiff) filed this premises liability action against defendants Culver City (Defendant) and the United State Postal Service on December 12, 2024. Defendant now moves to compel nonparty Deen & Company CPA (Deponent) to comply with a subpoena for business records. The motion is unopposed.

Analysis

Defendant has failed to prove effective service of its subpoena or its motion. A motion lies to compel a non-party witness to obey a deposition subpoena, and contempt is available where the non-party consciously refused to attend the deposition, and had knowledge of the subpoena, and an ability to comply. (Code Civ. Proc., Sec. 1987.1; Person v. Farmers Insurance Group of Cos. (1997) 52 Cal.App.4th 813, 818; Chapman v. Superior Court (1968) 261 Cal.App.2d 194, 200; Weil & Brown, Civ. Pro. Before Trial (The Rutter Group 2011) P.P.8:609.1 and 8:611.)

However, for a nonparty subpoena to be effective, a deposition subpoena must be personally served. (Code Civ. Proc., Sec. 2020.220(b).) Personal service is a condition both for enforcement of the subpoena and for attendance at any court session purporting to enforce the subpoena. (Id., subd. (c).)

Moreover, the Rules of Court require 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 ... 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." (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1346.)

Defendant's motion specifies at its outset that Deponent is not a party to this action. (Not. of Mot., 1:26-27.) Attachments to Defendant's motion appear to show the subpoena was served by U.S. or electronic mail. (See Exh. A, p. 1 [letter from counsel referring to "attached Deposition Subpoena(s)"].) The Proof of Service attached to the Subpoena bears no signature and does not identify a person served or a method of service. (Id., at p. 4.) And the proof of service for the motion identifies the copy sent to Deponent as "Courtesy Copy Mail Service Only."

Deponent was entitled to personal service of the deposition subpoena and personal service of the motion that demands that it appear. Absent that service, the Court lacks jurisdiction to compel compliance with the subpoena. Defendant's motion is denied without prejudice.

Case Number: 25SMCV03911 Hearing Date: August 20, 2026 Dept: P Tentative Ruling Davis v. Costco Wholesale Corp, et al., Case No. 25SMCV03911 Hearing date August 20, 2026 Defendant Goshare Inc.'s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings

Background This is a personal injury action. Plaintiff Brian Davis sues Defendant Costco Wholesale Corporation and Goshare, Inc. for negligence. Davis's claims arise out of an injury he sustained while helping a Goshare installer assemble a bed he purchased from Costco. Davis filed the complaint on July 25, 2025. Costco answered on August 28, 2025. Goshare has not filed an answer.

On March 11, 2026, the Court granted Costco's four motions to compel discovery and a Motion to Deem RFAs admitted and sanctioned Davis $3,040.00 for failure to respond to discovery requests. On March 24, 2026, Costco moved for judgment on the pleadings based on Plaintiff's deemed admissions. On March 26, 2026, Goshare, Inc. filed the instant Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings on the same grounds. On April 17, 2026, the Court granted Costco's March 24, 2026 motion. Goshare's motion is now before the Court. As of August 18, 2026, Davis had filed no opposition.

Request for Judicial Goshare requests judicial notice of the Court's March 11, 2026, minute order granting Costco's Motion for Deemed Admissions and