MIGUEL FERNANDEZ, et al. vs GENERAL MOTORS, LLC., et al.

2025CUBC040333: MIGUEL FERNANDEZ, et al. vs GENERAL MOTORS, LLC., et al. 06/02/2026 in Department 21 Motion for Compliance Pursuant to CCP Section 871.26; and Request for Sanctions

Tentative Rulings. Parties and counsel appearing for oral argument should address the tentative decision. Parties may submit on the tentative decision by email, with a copy to all other parties in the matter, to courtroom21@ventura.courts.ca.gov before 8:00 a.m. on the day set for the hearing, with a subject line that includes “SUBMISSION ON TENTATIVE”, Case Number, Title and Party. If fewer than all parties submit on the tentative, the hearing will proceed, and the tentative ruling is subject to change. The clerk cannot advise if you should still appear or not. The decision of whether to appear for a hearing is to be made by the parties and their counsel. (Dept. 21 Rules & Procedures, p. 4, § II.I.)

The following is a statement of the Court’s tentative ruling. The Court may adopt, modify or reject the tentative ruling after hearing. The tentative ruling has no legal effect unless and until adopted by the Court.

Motion: Motion by Defendant General Motors, LLC (“Defendant” or “GM”) to compel compliance pursuant to CCP section 871.26, and for $1,500 in monetary sanctions against Plaintiff’s counsel (opposed).

Tentative Ruling: Defendant’s motion is GRANTED. Plaintiffs’ depositions are to be conducted within fifteen business (15) days.

The request for sanctions against Plaintiffs’ counsel Strategic Legal Practices, APC, is GRANTED in the amount of $1500, payable in fifteen (15) days.

Defendant is to give notice of this ruling within two (2) court days.

Discussion: CCP §871.26 does apply to this case and Plaintiffs have failed to comply with the code.

There is no dispute that the Plaintiffs have not complied - have not subjected themselves to deposition yet despite two notices and a failure to appear. While Plaintiffs claim that they are “willing” to be deposed, they fail to cure the issue in the Motion by simply offering a date for deposition and then actually appearing. They could have mooted the Motion but have not. At the very least, Plaintiffs’ counsel should have proposed alternative dates but failed to do so. Plaintiff’s claim that Defendant has sat upon its rights and waived the right to bring this Motion lacks merit.

Bringing the Motion before the deadline would have been futile, and Defendant appropriately attempted to resolve the issue outside of court on February 2, 2026 (within three months of the initial deadline) by re-noticing a deposition date for both Plaintiffs on April 2, 2026, a time agreed upon by Plaintiffs. Only after Plaintiffs failed to appear at that properly noticed deposition did Defendant file this Motion on April 22, 2026. Under the circumstances,

2025CUBC040333: MIGUEL FERNANDEZ, et al. vs GENERAL MOTORS, LLC., et al.

where was no waiver. This is a simple scheduling issue that should not have reached the Court. The main reason for the new statute was to avoid this type of motion clogging the Court. The Motion is GRANTED. Plaintiffs are to appear for depositions within 15 days of the date of this ruling.

Turning to sanctions: “Unless the party failing to comply with this section shows good cause, notwithstanding any other law and in addition to any other sanctions imposed pursuant to this chapter, a court shall impose sanctions” (CCP, § 871.26,. subd. (j)), including “[a] one-thousand-five-hundred-dollar ($1,500) sanction against the plaintiff's attorney or two-thousand-five-hundred-dollar ($2,500) sanction against the defense attorney respectively, paid within 15 business days for failure to comply with the provisions relating to depositions as prescribed in subdivision (c).” (CCP, § 871.26,. subd. (j)(2).)

The Court finds that Plaintiffs’ counsel fails to show good cause for the failure to comply with the 120-day requirement. The Court understands the volume of lemon law cases at issue between counsel’s firms, however, that does not excuse the failure to agree to a date for depositions over the past eleven months. The failure falls exclusively on Plaintiffs despite their claimed willingness to appear. Defendant’s request for sanctions in the amount of $1,500 is GRANTED. Sanctions are to be paid within 15 days of the date of this ruling.

2