Case Number:?BC594242????Hearing Date:?February 06, 2018????Dept:?SEC
VILLANUEVA v. MEB FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP #2
CASE NO.:??BC594242
HEARING:??02/06/18
JUDGE:???????LORI ANN FOURNIER
#1
TENTATIVE RULING
Defendant MEB FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP #2?s motion to compel the deposition of Plaintiff ELVIRA VILLANUEVA is?GRANTED. CCP ? 2025.450.
Plaintiff ELVIRA VILLANUEVA is?ORDERED?to appear for a deposition at a reasonable date and time to be determined by the moving party no later than 15 days from this hearing date. The date may be extended by agreement of the parties.
Defendant?s request for sanctions is DENIED.
Moving Party to give notice.
The Court finds that Defendant is clearly entitled to take Plaintiff?s deposition. Any party may obtain discovery? by taking in California the oral deposition of any person,?including any party to the action.? (CCP ?2025.010.) (emphasis added.) In Opposition, Plaintiff?s Counsel argues that Plaintiff?s age and health preclude the taking of her deposition. Notwithstanding, Plaintiff has failed to either: (1) move for a protective order; or (2) submit any evidence to show that Plaintiff cannot be deposed due to health issues. In California, a party is entitled to conduct discovery as to any matter, not privileged, that is relevant to the subject matter and is either admissible or is reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. (CCP ?2017.010.) The Court finds that the generally liberal policy favoring discovery applies here. Where Plaintiff has failed to provide the Court with either a motion for protective order; or a declaration that is supported by evidence showing that a deposition would amount to harassment or be unduly burdensome, there is nothing to show that the instant motion should not be granted.
Defendant?s request for monetary sanctions is denied. Due to the facts presented, coupled with Plaintiff?s advanced age (97) Plaintiff is substantially justified in her refusal to comply with Defendant?s notices of deposition.