Brun v. Bailey

In Brun v. Bailey (1994) 27 Cal.App.4th 641, a nonparty chiropractor moved for a protective order compelling expert witness fees for his deposition testimony. Section 2025, subdivision (i) provides, in pertinent part, that "any party, any deponent, or any other affected natural person or organization may promptly move for a protective order." The Brun court concluded that the nonparty chiropractor had standing to seek specific relief under the language of section 2025, subdivision (i). Because the chiropractor had standing to bring his motion, he had standing to appeal the denial of the motion he was statutorily authorized to make. The statutory provision at issue in Brun refers to parties as well as any deponent or any other affected natural person or organization. Neither section 473 nor 1008 contain similarly inclusive language. In Brun and McClearen, the nonparties filed motions authorized by statute on matters collateral to the subject of the underlying litigation. As a result, they became parties to the proceedings on their motions. The superior courts' rulings on these motions were appealable orders, because the rulings amounted to a final determination on collateral matters.