On 03/09/2018 ASSAEL HALLELUYAN filed a Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle lawsuit against JOANNA DICKSON. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judges overseeing this case are JON R. TAKASUGI, HOLLY E. KENDIG and THOMAS D. LONG. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.
Pending - Other Pending
Los Angeles County Superior Courts
Stanley Mosk Courthouse
Los Angeles, California
JON R. TAKASUGI
HOLLY E. KENDIG
THOMAS D. LONG
DOES 1 TO 25
MITCHELL TIMOTHY P. ESQ.
MITCHELL TIMOTHY P.
MITCHELL TIMOTHY PAUL
10/13/2020: Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR [MINUTE ORDER (COURT ORDER RESCHEDULING HEARINGS DUE TO EMERGENCY ORDERS RE:...)]
9/4/2020: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (COURT ORDER RESCHEDULING HEARINGS DUE TO EMERGENCY ORDERS RE:...)
9/4/2020: Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR (COURT ORDER RESCHEDULING HEARINGS DUE TO EMERGENCY ORDERS RE:...) OF 09/04/2020
5/28/2020: [Proposed Order] and Stipulation to Continue Trial, FSC (and Related Motion/Discovery Dates) Person - [PROPOSED ORDER] AND STIPULATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL, FSC (AND RELATED MOTION/DISCOVERY DATES) PERSO
4/8/2020: Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR [NOTICE OF REJECTION OF ELECTRONIC FILING]
1/30/2020: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (TRIAL SETTING CONFERENCE)
1/21/2020: Demand for Jury Trial
12/18/2019: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: FAILURE TO FILE PROOF OF SERVICE)
11/20/2019: Proof of Personal Service
11/6/2019: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON MOTION - OTHER TO COMPEL APPEARANCE AT DEPOSITION)
10/24/2019: Opposition - OPPOSITION NON-PARTY AUTOMOBILE CLUB OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIAS SPECIAL APPEARANCE MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITITES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS MOTION TO COMPEL APPEARANCE AT DEPOSITI
10/30/2019: Reply - REPLY REPLY TO OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO COMPEL DEPOSITION
10/7/2019: Motion re: - MOTION RE: TO COMPEL APPEARANCE AT DEPOSITION
8/23/2019: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (FINAL STATUS CONFERENCE)
3/9/2018: Civil Case Cover Sheet - /Addendum
3/9/2018: Summons -
3/9/2018: Complaint -
Hearing06/03/2022 at 08:30 AM in Department 31 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Jury TrialRead MoreRead Less
Hearing05/20/2022 at 10:00 AM in Department 31 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Final Status ConferenceRead MoreRead Less
Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 3, Holly E. Kendig, Presiding; (OSC RE Dismissal) - Not Held - Advanced and VacatedRead MoreRead Less
Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 31, Thomas D. Long, Presiding; Jury Trial - Not Held - Advanced and VacatedRead MoreRead Less
Docketat 10:30 AM in Department 31, Thomas D. Long, Presiding; Trial Setting Conference - HeldRead MoreRead Less
Docketat 10:00 AM in Department 31, Thomas D. Long, Presiding; Final Status Conference - Not Held - Advanced and VacatedRead MoreRead Less
DocketMinute Order ( (TRIAL SETTING CONFERENCE)); Filed by ClerkRead MoreRead Less
DocketCertificate of Mailing for ([Minute Order (Court Order Rescheduling Hearings due to Emergency Orders Re:...)]); Filed by ClerkRead MoreRead Less
Docketat 2:58 PM in Department 31, Thomas D. Long, Presiding; Court OrderRead MoreRead Less
DocketMinute Order ( (Court Order Rescheduling Hearings due to Emergency Orders Re:...)); Filed by ClerkRead MoreRead Less
DocketReply (Reply to Opposition to Motion to Compel Deposition); Filed by Assael Halleluyan (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
DocketOpposition (NON-PARTY AUTOMOBILE CLUB OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA?S SPECIAL APPEARANCE MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITITES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF?S MOTION TO COMPEL APPEARANCE AT DEPOSITION AND FOR SANCTIONS IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,421.50; DECLARATION OF ERIC S. BLUM;); Filed by Assael Halleluyan (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
DocketMotion re: (to compel appearance at deposition); Filed by Assael Halleluyan (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 3, Holly E. Kendig, Presiding; Jury Trial - Not Held - Advanced and VacatedRead MoreRead Less
Docketat 10:00 AM in Department 3, Holly E. Kendig, Presiding; Final Status Conference - Not Held - Vacated by CourtRead MoreRead Less
DocketMinute Order ( (Final Status Conference)); Filed by ClerkRead MoreRead Less
DocketComplaintRead MoreRead Less
DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet /AddendumRead MoreRead Less
DocketSummons; Filed by Assael Halleluyan (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
DocketComplaint; Filed by Assael Halleluyan (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
Case Number: BC697461 Hearing Date: November 06, 2019 Dept: 3
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT
JOANNA DICKSON, ET AL.,
Case No.: BC697461
[TENTATIVE] ORDER DENYING MOTION TO COMPEL APPEARANCE AT DEPOSITION
November 6, 2019
1. Background Facts
Plaintiff, Assael Halleluyan filed this action against Defendant, Joanna Dickson for damages arising out of an automobile accident. To date, Plaintiff has not been able to locate Defendant, and has not served Defendant with the summons and complaint.
2. Motion to Compel Deposition
On 8/28/19, Plaintiff served a deposition subpoena for personal appearance and production of documents and things on Defendant’s insurance carrier, AAA. Plaintiff served the subpoena on “John Doe – Security Guard.” The deposition was set for 9/23/19. AAA failed to appear at the deposition.
b. Parties’ Positions
Plaintiff moves to compel AAA to appear and seeks imposition of sanctions. Plaintiff contends AAA failed to appear for its properly noticed deposition.
AAA opposes the motion, arguing (a) service of the deposition subpoena on it was improper, and (b) Plaintiff was required to serve a Notice to Consumer on Defendant in order to satisfy the notice requirements and permit the deposition to go forward.
Plaintiff, in reply, argues the whole purpose of the subpoena is to locate Defendant, so serving a Notice to Consumer would not be possible. Plaintiff argues service of the subpoena on the security guard was proper under the circumstances.
c. Service of the Subpoena
Personal service of a deposition subpoena issued to a non-party is required, not service by mail. CCP § 2020.220(b)-(c). Service on a business entity may be made by delivering the subpoena to any officer, director or custodian of records (or any agent or employee authorized to accept service). CCP § 2020.220(b)(2).
Plaintiff purported to serve AAA by serving its security guard. A security guard is not one of the persons enumerated above. Plaintiff cites authority, in opposition to the motion, that concerns service of a summons and complaint. Plaintiff does not cite any authority in the context of a deposition subpoena propounded to a non-party. The Court finds service of the subpoena was not proper and did not require AAA to appear.
d. Notice to Consumer
In order to avoid additional disputes between Plaintiff and AAA, the Court will rule on the issue concerning the Notice to Consumer as well.
Special notice and procedures are required for production of the “personal records” of a “consumer” or employee, to protect that person's right of privacy. The purpose is to give that person the opportunity to seek a court order to quash or limit the subpoena before the records are disclosed. CCP §§ 1985.3(e), 1985.6(e).
Personal records include records maintained by an insurance company. §1985.3(a)(1). Consumer means any noncorporate party. §1985.4. When seeking production of a consumer’s personal records, the subpoenaing party must serve a copy of the subpoena and a notice of privacy rights on the consumer before it serves the subpoena. §1985.3(e).
In this case, Defendant is clearly a consumer and AAA is an insurance company. The statute therefore applies, and Plaintiff must serve Defendant with a Notice of Consumer in order to obtain the records sought from AAA. The Court understands the frustration this creates. The purpose of the subpoena is to discover Defendant’s address, and Defendant cannot be served with the required notice if Plaintiff does not have Defendant’s address. Plaintiff fails, however, to cite any authority for the position that the notice requirements are waived under the circumstances, and the Court knows of none.
The motion to compel is denied on this additional ground as well.
AAA seeks imposition of sanctions in the event the motion is denied. Sanctions are appropriate per CCP §§2023.030 and 2025.480. AAA’s request for $1400 is reasonable, fully supported by AAA’s attorney’s declaration, and granted in full. Plaintiff and his attorney of record, jointly and severally are ordered to pay sanctions to AAA, by and through its attorney, in the amount of $1400, within twenty days.
Plaintiff is ordered to give notice.
Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the court at email@example.com indicating intention to submit on the tentative as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org. If the department does not receive an email indicating the parties are submitting on the tentative and there are no appearances at the hearing, the motion may be placed off calendar. If a party submits on the tentative, the party’s email must include the case number and must identify the party submitting on the tentative.
Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases