What is the test for a motion seeking a preliminary injunction preventing Respondent from giving evidence in his own personal injury trial?

Respondent argues that the appeal is moot because his deposition already has taken place. We may review moot issues if they are of broad public interest and likely to recur or cause another controversy among the parties. (Epstein v. Superior Court (2011) 193 Cal.App.4th 1405, 1411.) Although respondent believes he would not be compelled to testify at trial, appellants represent his testimony will likely be required in more than one related investor action in Texas. Assuming that any future elicitation of respondent's testimony pursuant to discovery orders of the Texas court will continue to implicate the principle of comity, we opt to review the order denying appellants' request for a preliminary injunction.