Allegra Aquil-Sims vs. Brian A Ramirez

34-2019-00264029-CU-PA-GDS: Allegra Aquil-Sims vs. Brian A Ramirez 04/03/2025 Hearing on Motion to Compel Attendance and Testimony at Deposition of Brian Ramirez in Department 53

Tentative Ruling

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 Law and Motion Oral Argument Request Line at (916) 874-2615 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 53/54 Zoom Link is https://saccourt-cagov.zoomgov.com/my/sscdept53.54 and the Zoom Meeting ID is 161 4650 6749. 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 in the Policy for Official Reporter Pro Tempore available on the Sacramento Superior Court website at https://www.saccourt.ca.gov/court-reporters/docs/crtrp-6a.pdf. Parties may contact Court- Approved Official Reporters Pro Tempore by utilizing the list of Court Approved Official Reporters Pro Tempore available at https://www.saccourt.ca.gov/court-reporters/docs/crtrp- 13.pdf.

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

34-2019-00264029-CU-PA-GDS: Allegra Aquil-Sims vs. Brian A Ramirez 04/03/2025 Hearing on Motion to Compel Attendance and Testimony at Deposition of Brian Ramirez in Department 53

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.

TENTATIVE RULING: Plaintiffs Allegra Aquil-Sims and Gregory Harriel’s unopposed motion to compel Defendant Brian Ramirez to appear at deposition is granted.

Plaintiffs have been attempting to take Defendant’s deposition since July 2023. Since that time Plaintiffs have noticed Defendant’s deposition two times and neither Defendant nor Defendant’s attorney appeared at any of the properly noticed depositions. The instant motion followed.

Pursuant to CCP § 2025.450(a), if after service of a deposition notice, the party subject to the notice without having served a valid objection ”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.”

No opposition to the motion was filed. A party’s failure to oppose a motion is construed as a concession on the merits of the motion. (See D.I. Chadbourne, Inc. v. Superior Court (1964) 60 Cal.2d 723, 728, n.4.)

The unopposed motion is granted. Defendant shall appear for his deposition. The deposition shall occur by May 3, 2025, though the parties are free to agree on a later date. The parties shall meet and confer on the specific date, time, and location. However, should the parties not agree on a specific date, time and location, Plaintiffs may unilaterally set the deposition to occur prior to May 3, 2025.

Plaintiffs’ request for mandatory monetary sanctions pursuant to CCP § 2025.450(g)(1) is granted. However, the requested amount of $4,000 is excessive Defendant and Defendant’s counsel, jointly and severally, shall pay to Plaintiff a mandatory monetary sanction in the amount of $1,200 ($400/hr x 3 hrs). The monetary sanction is to be paid on or before May 3, 2025. If the sanction is not paid by that date, Plaintiffs may prepare for the Court’s signature a formal order granting the sanctions, which may itself be enforced in the same manner and with the same force and effect as a money judgment. (Newland v. Superior Court (1995) 40 Cal.App.4th 608, 615 [“monetary sanction orders are enforceable through the execution of judgment laws”].)

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO

34-2019-00264029-CU-PA-GDS: Allegra Aquil-Sims vs. Brian A Ramirez 04/03/2025 Hearing on Motion to Compel Attendance and Testimony at Deposition of Brian Ramirez in Department 53

The minute order is effective immediately. No formal order pursuant to CRC Rule 3.1312 or further notice is required.