Motion To Quash

Cal. Super. - 2nd Dist.September 20, 2016

123 Judge SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, TENTATIVE RULINGS EVENT DATE: EVENT TIME: VENTURA DIVISION February 22, 2017 02/28/2017 08:20:00 AM DEPT.: 21 COUNTY OF VENTURA JUDICIAL OFFICER: Kent Kellegrew CASE NUM: CASE CATEGORY: EVENT TYPE: CASE TITLE: CASE TYPE:Civil - Unlimited Fraud 56-2016-00486824-CU-FR-VTA TOYAKA LIMITED VS AKREY Motion To Quash - Notice of Deposition and Protective CAUSAL DOCUMENT/DATE FILED: Motion to Quash, 01/03/2017 stolo Motion: D Rand Akrey's motion to quash notice of deposition and for protective order. Opposed. The Court intends to Deny the motion to quash. Analysis: The Court intends to Deny the motion to quash because it is premature. P can invoke the privilege, if appropriate, at the deposition. (Fuller v. Superior Court (2001) 87 CA4th 299, 309-310.) If P invokes the privilege as to some questions, the Court will then have to make a particularized inquiry to decide if the privilege is well founded. And according to P, this issue could be moot in less than 90 days. "...a party is not entitled to decide for himself or herself whether the privilege against self-incrimination may be invoked. ' "Rather, this question is for the court to decide after conducting 'a particularized inquiry, deciding, in connection with each specific area that the questioning party seeks to explore, whether or not the privilege is well founded.' [Citation.]" [Citations.]' (Warford v. Medeiros (1984) 160 Cal.App.3d 1035, 1045 [involving nonparty's right to invoke privilege against self-incrimination], [original] italics, . . . .) This principle applies in both civil and criminal proceedings, and under both the federal and state Constitutions. (Warford at p. 1045; Blackburn v. Superior Court (1993) 21 Cal.App.4th 414, 428.) Only after the party claiming the privilege objects with specificity to the information sought can the court make a determination about whether the privilege may be invoked. (Blackburn v. Superior Court, supra, 21 Cal.App.4th 414.)" TENTATIVE RULINGS Page: 1