On 02/03/2017 MARK MECHALY filed a Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle lawsuit against SEVEN BROS ENTERPRISE, INC. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judges overseeing this case are LAURA A. SEIGLE and AMY D. HOGUE. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.
Pending - Other Pending
Los Angeles County Superior Courts
Stanley Mosk Courthouse
Los Angeles, California
LAURA A. SEIGLE
AMY D. HOGUE
RNB FURNITURE INC
DOES 1 TO 50
SEVEN BROS ENTERPRISES INC
EMRANI JACOB ESQ.
ELMASSIAN ALBERT JOHN
MCREYNOLDS C.R. ESQ.
LAW OFFICES OF CRAIG A. HOLTZ
11/22/2017: SUBSTITUTION OF ATTORNEY
1/9/2018: PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS
1/9/2018: PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS
2/5/2018: ANSWER,DEMAND FOR JURY AND NOTICE OF POSTING JURY FEES
2/7/2018: Notice of Change of Address or Other Contact Information
6/5/2018: [PROPOSED ORDER] AND STIPULATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL, FSC [AND RELATED MOTION/DISCOVERY DATES] PERSONAL INJURY COURTS ONLY
7/2/2018: NOTICE OF ENTRY OF ORDER ON STIPULATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL, FSC [AND RELATED MOTION/DISCOVERY DATES]
10/29/2018: Stipulation and Order
12/26/2018: Ex Parte Application
12/26/2018: Minute Order
3/15/2019: Notice of Stay of Proceedings
3/26/2019: Notice of Lien
4/9/2019: Minute Order
5/24/2019: Motion to Compel
at 1:30 PM in Department 4B, Laura A. Seigle, Presiding; Hearing on Motion to Compel (Plaintiff's accountant to comply with Defendant's subpoena duces tecum and produce all accounting/tax records) - Not Held - Vacated by CourtRead MoreRead Less
Reply (Reply to Plaintiff's Opposition to Motion to Compel Responses to Supplemental Discovery); Filed by Seven Bros Enterprises, Inc (Defendant); Miguel Barrios (Defendant)Read MoreRead Less
Opposition (Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Compel); Filed by Mark Mechaly (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
Motion to Compel (Motion to Compel Responses to Supplemental discovery); Filed by Seven Bros Enterprises, Inc (Defendant); Miguel Barrios (Defendant)Read MoreRead Less
Opposition (Opposition to Defendants' Request for Sanctions Against Former Counsel; Request for Sanctions Against Defendants & Defense Counsel); Filed by Mark Mechaly (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
at 08:30 AM in Department 4B, Laura A. Seigle, Presiding; Trial Setting Conference - Not Held - Continued - Court's MotionRead MoreRead Less
at 08:30 AM in Department 4B, Laura A. Seigle, Presiding; Status Conference Re: Bankruptcy - Not Held - Continued - Court's MotionRead MoreRead Less
Minute Order ( (Status Conference Re: Bankruptcy)); Filed by ClerkRead MoreRead Less
at 08:30 AM in Department 4B, Laura A. Seigle, Presiding; Jury Trial - Not Held - Vacated by CourtRead MoreRead Less
at 10:00 AM in Department 4B, Laura A. Seigle, Presiding; Final Status Conference - Not Held - Taken Off Calendar by CourtRead MoreRead Less
PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONSRead MoreRead Less
NOTICE OF LIENRead MoreRead Less
Notice of Lien; Filed by Mark Mechaly (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
SUMMONSRead MoreRead Less
Substitution of Attorney; Filed by Mark Mechaly (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
SUBSTITUTION OF ATTORNEYRead MoreRead Less
Summons; Filed by Mark Mechaly (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
Complaint; Filed by Mark Mechaly (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
ComplaintRead MoreRead Less
Summons; Filed by Plaintiff/PetitionerRead MoreRead Less
Case Number: BC648622 Hearing Date: January 03, 2020 Dept: 4B
[TENTATIVE] ORDER RE: PLAINTIFF’S MOTIONS TO COMPEL DEPOSITIONS OF SEVEN BROS ENTERPRISES, INC., KEVIN TRINH, AND HOWARD TRINH
On February 3, 2017, Plaintiff Marc Mechaly (“Plaintiff”) filed this action for motor vehicle negligence relating to an accident on February 6, 2017. The case was stayed for a while due to a bankruptcy. The stay was lifted.
Plaintiff noticed the deposition of the PMZ of Defendant Seven Bros Enterprises, Inc., (“Seven Bros”) for February 13, 2019, March 20, 2019, and August 14, 2019. Plaintiff states he noticed the depositions of Kevin Trinh and Howard Trinh for March 20, 2019 and August 13, 2019. In October and December, Plaintiff’s counsel sent emails requesting deposition dates. Upon receiving no responses, Plaintiff filed this motion to compel the depositions. Defendants filed no opposition.
Any party may obtain discovery, subject to restrictions, by taking the oral deposition of any person, including any party to the action. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2025.010.) A properly served deposition notice is effective to require a party or party-affiliated deponent to attend and to testify, as well as to produce documents for inspection and copying. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2025.280, subd. (a).) The party served with a deposition notice waives any error or irregularity unless that party promptly serves a written objection at least three calendar days prior to the date for which the deposition is scheduled. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2025.410, subd. (a).) In addition to serving this written objection, a party may also move for an order staying the taking of the deposition and quashing the deposition notice. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2025.410, subd. (c).) “If, after service of a deposition notice, a party . . . without having served a valid objection . . . fails to appear for examination, or to proceed with it, or to produce for inspection any document . . . described in the deposition notice, the party giving notice may move for an order compelling deponent’s attendance and testimony, and the production . . . of any document . . . described in the deposition notice.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 2025.450, subd. (a).)
The Motion to compel the deposition of Seven Bros’ PMQ deposition is GRANTED and Seven Bros’ PMQ is ordered to appear for deposition within twenty (20) days of the date of this Order, or other day to which the parties agree.
Plaintiff did not identify Kevin Trinh and Howard Trinh. Based on the pleadings, Kevin Trinh and Howard Trinh are not parties. There is no indication that Kevin Trinh and Howard Trinh are represented by Seven Bros.’ counsel. There is no evidence they work for Seven Bros., that Plaintiff subpoenaed them, or that they received notice of Plaintiff’s motion. Therefore, the Court DENIES Plaintiff’s motion as to their depositions.
Code of Civil Procedure section 2023.030 provides that a court may impose a monetary sanction for misuse of the discovery process unless a court finds that the one subject to sanction acted with substantial justification or that other circumstances make the imposition of the sanction unjust. The request for monetary sanctions is GRANTED and imposed against Seven Bros and its counsel, jointly and severally in the reduced amount of $460.00, to be paid within twenty (20) days of the date of this Order.
Moving party to give notice.
Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at SSCDEPT4B@lacourt.org indicating intention to submit on the tentative.