VERHOEVEN, et al. vs WANG, et al.

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

24CV026098: VERHOEVEN, et al. vs WANG, et al. 05/06/2026 Hearing on Motion for Order Directing Compliance with Subpoena for Deposition of Witness Maciah Fullwood in Department 8D

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

***NOTICE: EFFECTIVE APRIL 13, 2026, THIS DEPARTMENT HAS MOVED TO THE TANI G. CANTIL-SAKAUYE COURTHOUSE LOCATED AT 500 G. ST. SACRAMENTO, CA. ALL MOTIONS NOTICED FOR DEPARTMENT 25 WILL BE HEARD IN DEPARTMENT 8D OF THE NEW COURTHOUSE. ALL PAPERS FOR THIS DEPARTMENT MUST BE FILED AT THIS NEW LOCATION AND WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED AT THE HALL OF JUSTICE. ALL HEARINGS WILL TAKE PLACE AT THIS NEW LOCATION****

TENTATIVE RULING

Defendant Anibal Perez’s (“Defendant”) motion for an order compelling third-party witness Maciah Fullwood (“Fullwood”) to comply with Defendant’s Deposition Subpoena for Personal Appearance is UNOPPOSED and Denied.

This action arises out of a collision which occurred on August 10, 2023 at approximately 10:24 pm on Highway 99 in the County of Sacramento. Decedent, Alexander Verhoeven (“Decedent”) was riding his motorcycle at the time of the collision. Defendant explains in her moving papers that Decedent “caused his motorcycle to strike the rear of a 2016 Acura being driven by co-defendant Michael Wang.” (Moving MPA at 3:13-15.) Decedent was then thrown from his motorcycle and was thereafter struck in succession by multiple vehicles” including by Defendant, who was operating her 1999 Lexus. (Id., at 3:15-17.)

Defendant further explains that Fullwood was listed as an “independent witness” on the Traffic Collision Report prepared by the California Highway Patrol. (See Declaration of Christian B. Green ¶ 1, Exhibit A.) The Traffic Collision Report sets forth a statement that is represented to be provided by Fullwood. (Id. at Exhibit A.)

Decedent’s parents, James Verhoeven and Karen Verhoeven, filed this action for wrongful death on December 23, 2024.

On September 21, 2025, Fullwood was personally served with a “Notice of Deposition of Witness” for a deposition to take place at “REMOTE” on October 21, 2025, at 2:00 pm.

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO

24CV026098: VERHOEVEN, et al. vs WANG, et al. 05/06/2026 Hearing on Motion for Order Directing Compliance with Subpoena for Deposition of Witness Maciah Fullwood in Department 8D

(Id., at ¶ 2, Exhibit B.) Fullwood failed to appear to at the scheduled deposition. (Id., at ¶ 3.) Fullwood did not object or otherwise respond to the served material. (Ibid.) Defendant’s counsel thereafter made attempts to reach Fullwood, but Fullwood never responded to these attempts.

Defendant now moves for an order compelling the deposition of Fullwood. While Fullwood has failed to oppose this motion, it is nevertheless DENIED.

Code of Civil Procedure section 2025.280 states:

(a) The service of a deposition notice under Section 2025.240 is effective to require any deponent who is a party to the action or an officer, director, managing agent, or employee of a party to attend and to testify, as well as to produce any document, electronically stored information, or tangible thing for inspection and copying. (b) The attendance and testimony of any other deponent, as well as the production by the deponent of any document, electronically stored information, or tangible thing for inspection and copying, requires the service on the deponent of a deposition subpoena under Chapter 6 (commencing with Section 2020.010).

(Emphasis added.)

Where the witness whose deposition is sought is a non-party to the action a subpoena must be served to compel the witness’ attendance, testimony, or production of documents. (Code of Civ. Proc., § 2020.010 subd. (b).) Moreover, while any attorney may sign and issue a deposition subpoena, the mandatory Judicial Council form must be utilized. (Weil & Brown, Civ. Proc. Before Trial, 8:539.) In this case, where it appears that only testimony from a non-party witness is sought, the issuing party must utilize the mandatory Judicial Council form SUBP-015.

Here, Defendant did not issue a subpoena, but rather served non-party Fullwood with a “Notice of Deposition.” Nor does the proof of service indicate that a subpoena was served with the notice of deposition. Moreover, Defendant failed to utilize the mandatory Judicial Council form.

Nevertheless, at hearing on a related motion involving a different non-party, on Monday, May 4, 2026, counsel for Defendant represented that a subpoena, utilizing the proper form, had been served on non-party Fullwood. In light of counsel’s representation, the Court continues this matter to provide additional time for Defendant to file and properly

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO

24CV026098: VERHOEVEN, et al. vs WANG, et al. 05/06/2026 Hearing on Motion for Order Directing Compliance with Subpoena for Deposition of Witness Maciah Fullwood in Department 8D

serve a supplemental declaration with the original subpoena and proof of service of the subpoena on all parties, including the third party at issue in this pending motion, as well as to allow time for any responsive papers.

This matter is continued to June 10, 2026 at 1:30 p.m. in Department 8D.

Defendant shall serve a copy of this Order and file and serve a supplemental declaration with a copy of the subpoena no later than 16 court days prior to the continued hearing consistent with the terms of Code of Civil Procedure section 1005. Service on the non-party shall be by personal service. Consistent with the provisions of section 1005, any opposition to the supplemental declaration shall be filed and served no later than 9 court days prior to the continued hearing, and replies shall be filed and served no later than 5 court days prior to the continued hearing.

The minute order is effective immediately. No formal order pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 3.1312 or further notice is required.

On the Court's own motion, the Hearing on Motion for Order Directing Compliance with Subpoena for Deposition of Witness Maciah Fullwood scheduled for 05/06/2026 is continued to 06/10/2026 at 01:30 PM in Department 8D at Tani G. Cantil-Sakauye Courthouse.