REEDBURG vs FOX, et al.

25CV004624: REEDBURG vs FOX, et al. 07/23/2026 Hearing on Motion to Compel Plaintiff to Appear at Deposition in Department 16C

Tentative Ruling

Defendant John Fox’s (“Defendant”) motion to compel plaintiff in pro per Malekka Reedburg (“Plaintiff”) to appear for deposition is UNOPPOSED and GRANTED as follows.

Defendant served Plaintiff with a Notice of Taking Deposition on April 29, 2025, with a deposition date of July 30, 2025. On May 28, 2025, Plaintiff informed Defendant via email that she was unable to appear for her deposition due to the death of relatives. Plaintiff further stated that she would be able to attend her deposition if it was scheduled after September 30, 2025.

On or about July 16, 2025, Defendant conferred with Plaintiff and proposed an amended deposition date of October 14, 2025. Plaintiff did not respond to Defendant’s attempt to confer and reschedule.

On or about October 14, 2025, Defendant served Plaintiff with an Amended Notice of Taking Deposition, with a deposition date of December 12, 2025, via email and U.S. Mail. Plaintiff did not acknowledge the Notice and did not appear for her deposition.

Defendant moves to compel Plaintiff attendance and testimony at deposition pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 2025.450(a), which provides, “If, after service of a deposition notice, a party to the action, without having served a valid objection under Section 2025.410, fails to appear for examination, or to proceed with it, or to produce for inspection any document, electronically stored information, or tangible thing described in the deposition notice, the party giving the notice may move for an order compelling the deponent's attendance and testimony, and the production for inspection of any document, electronically stored information, or tangible thing described in the deposition notice.” (Code Civ. Proc. § 2025.410.)

The record demonstrates Plaintiff has failed to appear for her deposition after service of a deposition notice without having served a valid objection. Accordingly, Defendant’s motion is GRANTED.

Plaintiff shall provide Defendant with available dates for her deposition no later than August 14, 2026, and the deposition shall take place no later than September 28, 2026.

25CV004624: REEDBURG vs FOX, et al. 07/23/2026 Hearing on Motion to Compel Plaintiff to Appear at Deposition in Department 16C

To the extent Defendant also seeks to compel Plaintiff to produce documents, the motion is denied. First, the notice of motion only indicates that Defendant is seeking to compel Plaintiff to attend a deposition and provide testimony and does not refer to any document production. Second, with respect to a motion to compel documents described in a deposition notice, the “motion shall set forth specific facts showing good cause justifying the production for inspection of any document, electronically stored information, or tangible thing described in the deposition notice.” (Code Civ.

Proc. § 2025.450(b)(1).) Defendant’s memorandum of points and authorities does not reference the requests at all and, thus, the Court will not issue any order compelling the production of any documents at the deposition. Third and finally, any such order would be premature because no deposition has occurred and, therefore, no deponent has failed to produce documents requested in the deposition notice.

Defendant’s request for monetary sanctions is GRANTED in the reduced amount of $780 (representing three hours of attorney time at the rate of $240 per hour, plus the $60 filing fee). Sanctions to be paid no later than August 24, 2026, and, if not paid by that date, Defendant may prepare for the Court's signature a formal order granting the sanctions, which may then be enforced as a separate judgment. (Newland v. Superior Court (1995) 40 Cal.App.4th 608, 615.)

The notice of motion does not provide notice of the Court’s tentative ruling system, as required by Local Rule 1.06. Defendant is directed to contact Plaintiff and advise of Local Rule 1.06 and the Court’s tentative ruling procedure and the manner to request a hearing. If Defendant is unable to contact Plaintiff prior to hearing, moving counsel is ordered to appear at the hearing.

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

NOTICE:

Consistent with Local Rule 1.06(B), any party requesting oral argument on any matter on this calendar must comply with the following procedure:

To request limited oral argument, on any matter on this calendar, you must call the Department

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO

25CV004624: REEDBURG vs FOX, et al. 07/23/2026 Hearing on Motion to Compel Plaintiff to Appear at Deposition in Department 16C

16C Oral Argument Request Line at (916) 874-1475 by 4:00 p.m. the Court day before the hearing and advise opposing counsel. At the time of requesting oral argument, the requesting party shall leave a voice mail message: a) identifying themselves as the party requesting oral argument; b) indicating the specific matter/motion for which they are requesting oral argument; and c) confirming that it has notified the opposing party of its intention to appear and that opposing party may appear via Zoom using the Zoom link and Meeting ID indicated below. If no request for oral argument is made, the tentative ruling becomes the final order of the Court.

Unless ordered to appear in person by the Court, parties may appear remotely either telephonically or by video conference via the Zoom video/audio conference platform with notice to the Court and all other parties in accordance with Code of Civil Procedure §367.75. Although remote participation is not required, the Court will presume all parties are appearing remotely for non-evidentiary civil hearings.

The Department 16C Zoom Link is https://saccourt-ca-gov.zoomgov.com/j/16030877014 and the Zoom Meeting ID is 160 3087 7014. To appear on Zoom telephonically, call (833) 568-8864 and enter the Zoom Meeting ID referenced above. NO COURTCALL APPEARANCES WILL BE ACCEPTED.

Parties requesting services of a court reporter will need to arrange for private court reporter services at their own expense, pursuant to Government code §68086 and California Rules of Court, Rule 2.956. Requirements for requesting a court reporter are listed on the Court Reporter Services webpage available on the Sacramento Superior Court website at https://saccourt.ca.gov/general-information/court-reporter-services-transcripts. Parties may contact Court- Approved Official Reporters Pro Tempore by utilizing the list of Court Approved Official Reporters Pro Tempore available at https://saccourt.ca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/227/639084034465370000.

A Stipulation and Appointment of Official Reporter Pro Tempore (CV/E-206) is required to be signed by each party, the private court reporter, and the Judge prior to the hearing, if not using a reporter from the Court’s Approved Official Reporter Pro Tempore list. 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 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 forward the form to the Court Reporter’s Office and an official reporter will be provided.

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO

25CV004624: REEDBURG vs FOX, et al. 07/23/2026 Hearing on Motion to Compel Plaintiff to Appear at Deposition in Department 16C

*** EFFECTIVE APRIL 13, 2026, THIS DEPARTMENT HAS MOVED TO THE TANI G. CANTIL- SAKAUYE COURTHOUSE LOCATED AT 500 G STREET IN SACRAMENTO, CA 95814. ALL HEARINGS NOTICED FOR DEPARTMENT 54 WILL BE HEARD IN DEPARTMENT 16C OF THE NEW COURTHOUSE. ***