Plaintiff suffers from PTSD. He sought to have his wife present at his deposition as an accommodation because she calms him alleviating some PTSD symptoms. Defendants opposed arguing that the wife was a percipient witness to the medical procedures that were the subject matter of the suit and allowing her to sit in on her husband’s deposition would allow her to conform her testimony to his. This decision holds that the trial court abused its discretion in denying plaintiff the requested accommodation under CRC 1.100. Plaintiff’s request for accommodation was not raised too late–though first mentioned in oral argument of defendant’s motion to compel the deposition without wife present. The rule says only that the request must be made at least 5 days before the “event” at which accommodation is requested. There was no evidence that the deposition was to occur in less than 5 days after the hearing. Defendant could accomplish its stated purpose by taking wife’s deposition first or by other simple measures.