On 09/06/2017 DANIEL MORALES filed a Personal Injury - Other Personal Injury lawsuit against SOUTH PASADENA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judges overseeing this case are CHRISTOPHER K. LUI and DANIEL M. CROWLEY. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.
Pending - Other Pending
Los Angeles County Superior Courts
Stanley Mosk Courthouse
Los Angeles, California
CHRISTOPHER K. LUI
DANIEL M. CROWLEY
SOUTH PASADENA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT
DOES 1 TO 100
DE LA ROSA ROLAND
KANAREK MARTIN J. ESQ.
BORDIN-WOSK JOSHUA D
KANAREK MARTIN JOEL ESQ.
KANAREK MARTIN J.
9/17/2019: Ex Parte Application - EX PARTE APPLICATION TO CONTINUE THE TRIAL DATE, FINAL STATUS CONFERENCE AND THE EXPERT CUT-OFF AND MOTION CUT-OFF DATE
3/11/2020: Motion in Limine - MOTION IN LIMINE MIL NO. 8 VALDES FACEBOOK POST
3/11/2020: Motion in Limine - MOTION IN LIMINE PLAINTIFF'S MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 4 TO EXCLUDE ROLAND DE LA ROSA'S SPECULATION THAT CAMPUS SUPERVISOR MR. G BELIEVED THAT ROLAND DE LA ROSA AND HIS FRIENDS WERE JUST
3/12/2020: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (FINAL STATUS CONFERENCE)
12/23/2020: Ex Parte Application - EX PARTE APPLICATION SHORTEN TIME TO HEAR MTC
12/30/2020: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON EX PARTE APPLICATION SHORTEN TIME TO HEAR MTC)
2/4/2021: Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR (DEFENDANT SOUTH PASADENA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT'S MOTION TO ...) OF 02/04/2021
6/7/2019: Declaration - DECLARATION COMPENDIUM OF EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF'S OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGEMENT
6/7/2019: Opposition - OPPOSITION MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
6/19/2019: Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint)
3/5/2018: REQUEST FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT -
2/25/2019: Notice of Deposit - Jury
2/25/2019: Proof of Personal Service
2/27/2019: Objection - Objection PLAINTIFFS OBJECTION TO DEFENDANTS EX PARTE TO CALENDAR THEIR MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT FOR MAY 9TH, 2019
4/16/2019: Motion for Summary Judgment
4/16/2019: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (COURT ORDER CONTINUING MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT)
1/11/2018: SUBSTITUTION OF ATTORNEY -
10/16/2017: SUMMONS -
Hearing01/25/2022 at 08:30 AM in Department 28 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Jury TrialRead MoreRead Less
Hearing01/11/2022 at 10:00 AM in Department 28 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Final Status ConferenceRead MoreRead Less
Hearing08/10/2021 at 08:30 AM in Department 28 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Hearing on Motion to Compel Cabeza DepositionRead MoreRead Less
Docketat 11:00 AM in Department 28, Daniel M. Crowley, Presiding; Informal Discovery Conference (IDC) - HeldRead MoreRead Less
DocketMinute Order ( (Informal Discovery Conference (IDC))); Filed by ClerkRead MoreRead Less
DocketInformal Discovery Conference Form for Personal Injury Courts; Filed by DANIEL MORALES (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
Docketat 10:00 AM in Department 28, Daniel M. Crowley, Presiding; Final Status Conference - Not Held - Continued - Court's MotionRead MoreRead Less
DocketMinute Order ( (Final Status Conference)); Filed by ClerkRead MoreRead Less
DocketDeclaration (of Dave Vacca); Filed by SOUTH PASADENA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT (Defendant)Read MoreRead Less
DocketMotion to Compel (JAVIER CABEZA TO COMPLY WITH DEPOSITION SUBPOENA;); Filed by SOUTH PASADENA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT (Defendant)Read MoreRead Less
DocketPROOF OF SERVICE OF SUMMONSRead MoreRead Less
DocketProof of Service (not Summons and Complaint); Filed by DANIEL MORALES (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
DocketSUMMONSRead MoreRead Less
DocketSummons; Filed by ClerkRead MoreRead Less
DocketSummons Issued; Filed by ClerkRead MoreRead Less
DocketOrd Apptng Guardian Ad Litem; Filed by Plaintiff/PetitionerRead MoreRead Less
DocketApplication ; Filed by Plaintiff/PetitionerRead MoreRead Less
DocketComplaint; Filed by DANIEL MORALES (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
DocketAPPLICATION AND ORDER FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM CIVILRead MoreRead Less
DocketCOMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES EMAND FOR JURY TRIALRead MoreRead Less
Case Number: BC674800 Hearing Date: February 04, 2021 Dept: 28
Motion to Compel Compliance
Having considered the moving and opposing papers, the Court rules as follows.
On September 6, 2017, Plaintiff Daniel Morales, by and through his guardian ad litem, Heidi Morales, (“Plaintiff”) filed a Complaint against Defendants South Pasadena Unified School District (“District”), Roland De La Rosa (“De La Rosa”), and Does 1 through 100. Plaintiff alleges that he was attached on campus by another student and alleges causes of action for (1) negligent supervision of students based on Government Code Sections 815.6 and 815.2 and 5 CCR Section 552 against District and Does 1 through 50, (2) negligent hiring, supervision, training, and retention based on Government Code Sections 815.6 and 815.2 against District and Does 1 through 50, (3) negligent infliction of emotional distress against all Defendants, (4) assault against De La Rosa, and (5) battery against De La Rosa.
On March 21, 2019, De La Rosa was dismissed.
On June 24, 2019, the Court denied Defendant District’s motion for summary judgment. At the June 24, 2019 Trial Setting Conference, jury trial was scheduled for October 7, 2019. On September 17, 2019, the Court granted Defendant’s ex parte application to continue the jury trial to December 5, 2019, but that only expert discovery and related pre-trial cut-off dates were expended based on the new trial date. At the December 4, 2019 final status conference, the final status conference and jury trial were continued to December 6, 2019 on the Court’s own motion. On December 6, 2019, the Court granted Defendant’s ex parte application to continue the jury trial and final status conference. The new trial date was January 29, 2020. On January 17, 2020, at the request of both parties’ attorneys, the Court granted a trial continuance to March 26, 2020. On March 12, 2020, on the Court’s own motion, the jury trial was continued to April 2, 2020.
On March 19, 2020, the jury trial scheduled for April 2, 2020 was vacated because of the state of emergency declared by Governor Newsom. A trial setting conference was scheduled for April 30, 2020. On April 16, 2020, the trial setting conference was scheduled to July 24, 2020. At the July 24, 2020 trial setting conference, jury trial was scheduled for March 10, 2021, and a final status conference was scheduled for February 24, 2021. All discovery and motion cut-off dates follow the new trial date.
Defendant filed the subject motion to compel nonparty Javier Cabeza to comply with deposition subpoena on December 21, 2020. On December 30, 2020, the Court granted Defendant’s ex parte application to shorten time to hear the motion to compel deposition of Javier Cabeza. The hearing was advanced and continued to February 4, 2021.
Defendant District asks the court to compel nonparty Javier Cabeza to comply with a March 13, 2020 deposition subpoena and appear for a deposition within ten days of this Court’s order.
A party seeking discovery from a person who is not a party to the action may obtain discovery by oral deposition, written deposition, or deposition for production of business records. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2020.010.) A deposition subpoena may command: (1) only the attendance and testimony of the deponent, (2) only the production of business records for copying, or (3) the attendance and testimony of the deponent, as well as the production of busines records, other documents, electronically stored information, and tangible things. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2020.020.) Personal service of any deposition subpoena is effective to require a deponent who is a resident of California to: personally appear and testify, if the subpoena so specifies; to produce any specified documents; and to appear at a court session if the subpoena so specifies.
Notice of Motion
“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 must 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.)
The Court notes that Proof of Service attached to Defendant’s motion to compel compliance does not indicate that nonparty Javier Cabezas was properly served with notice of this motion. Rather, the Proof of Service indicates that “Proof of Personal Service [on Javier Cabezas] will be filed upon receipt.” The Court has not been informed whether Mr. Cabezas has been properly and personally served with notice of this motion as required by California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1346.
Therefore, the ruling on this motion is conditional upon Defendant filing proof that Mr. Cabezas was personally served in a timely manner.
On March 13, 2020, Defendant served notice of nonparty Javier Cabeza’s deposition to take place on March 17, 2020. (Sampson Decl., ¶ 3, Exh. A.) The parties agreed to reschedule Cabeza’s deposition on March 16, 2020. (Id., ¶ 4.) On July 9, 2020 Plaintiff served Defendant with a notice for the deposition of Cabeza to take place on July 31, 2020. (Id., ¶ 5, Exh. B.) Due to restrictions put in place due to COVID-19, Cabeza’s deposition could not proceed at the noticed location as scheduled on July 31, 2020. (Id., ¶ 9.) On October 8, 2020, Defendant notified Plaintiff that Cabeza had agreed to appear for deposition on October 30, 2020. (Id., ¶ 10, Exh. D.) On October 14, 2020, Defendant confirmed with Cabeza that he would appear for deposition on October 30, 2020. (Vacca Decl., ¶ 2.) On October 30, 2020, all parties appeared for the remote deposition of Cabeza, but Cabeza did not appear. (Sampson Decl., ¶ 11.) Cabeza confirmed by text message that he would not be appearing for deposition. (Id., Exh. E.) In the weeks following October 30, 2020, Defendant attempted to coordinate with Cabeza to reset his deposition, but Cabeza did not respond. (Vacca Decl., ¶ 3.) On December 9, 2020, Defendant attempted to serve Mr. Cabeza at his new address and left contact information with Cabeza’s aunt, but Cabeza never contacted Defendant’s counsel. (Ibid.) On December 11, 2020, Defendant attempted to effectuate service of a subpoena at Cabeza’s new address. Cabeza indicated that he was refusing to comply with the subpoena. (Id., ¶ 5.) As of the filing of this motion, Cabeza has not complied with the deposition subpoena. (Sampson Decl., ¶ 12.)
Defendant argues that Cabeza’s deposition testimony is highly relevant to this case because he has personal knowledge of the incident and the circumstances leading up to and immediately following the incident.
Good cause having been show, the motion is granted.
The motion is GRANTED, but, again, conditioned upon Defendant filing proof that Mr. Cabezas was personally served with the instant motion in a timely manner.
Nonparty Javier Cabeza is ordered to comply with the deposition subpoena and appear for deposition within 10 days of this order, unless the parties stipulate in writing to another mutually convenient date and time.
Defendant South Pasadena Unified School District is to give notice.
The parties are directed to the header of this tentative ruling for further instructions.
Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases