Judge: Daniel M. Crowley, Case: 21STCP03778, Date: 2023-05-16 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCP03778    Hearing Date: May 16, 2023    Dept: 71

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

DEPARTMENT 71

TENTATIVE RULING

Petitioner State Farm Automobile Insurance Co.’s unopposed motion for terminating sanctions to dismiss and further bar Respondent Mariam Ahmadi’s Demand for Arbitration is denied.

Petitioner’s request for monetary sanctions against Respondent Mariam Ahmadi and her counsel of record is granted in the reduced amount of $490.00.  Sanctions are payable within 30 days.

          Petitioner State Farm Automobile Insurance Co. (“State Farm”) (“Petitioner”) moves unopposed for terminating sanctions to dismiss and further bar Respondent Mariam Ahmadi’s (“Ahmadi”) (“Respondent”) demand for arbitration.  (Notice of Motion, pg. 1.)  Petitioner further moves for monetary sanctions in the amount of $705.00[1] against Respondent and her counsel of record as a result of Respondent’s failure to comply with this Court’s 6/1/22 Ruling to serve responses to Petitioner’s discovery consisting of form interrogatories, special interrogatories, and requests for production within 15 days of notice of the order.  (Notice of Motion, pgs. 1-2; C.C.P §§2023.010, 2023.030, 2030.290, 2031.320.)

Background

On August 9, 2021, Petitioner served written discovery on Respondent.  Petitioner never received responses to discovery from Respondent, and on June 1, 2022, Petitioner’s motions to compel responses to form interrogatories, special interrogatories, and requests for production were granted by this Court.  (6/1/22 Ruling.)  To date, Petitioner has not received discovery responses from Respondent.  (Decl. of Reader ¶6.)

On October 18, 2022, Petitioner filed the instant motion. As of the date of this hearing Respondent has not filed an opposition.

 Terminating Sanctions

The Court, “after notice to any affected party . . . and after opportunity for hearing,” may impose terminating and/or monetary sanctions for misuses of the discovery process.  (C.C.P. §2023.030(a) and (d).)  Misuses of the discovery process include failing to respond or to submit to an authorized method of discovery and disobeying a court order to provide discovery.  (C.C.P. §§2023.010(d) and (g).) 

“A decision to order terminating sanctions should not be made lightly. But where a violation is willful, preceded by a history of abuse, and the evidence shows that less severe sanctions would not produce compliance with the discovery rules, the trial court is justified in imposing the ultimate sanction.”  (Mileikowsky v. Tenet Healthsystem (2005) 128 Cal.App.4th 262, 279-280.)  When deciding whether to impose terminating sanctions, courts generally weigh three factors: (1) whether the party subject to the sanction acted willfully, (2) the detriment to the party seeking discovery, and (3) the number of formal and informal unsuccessful attempts to obtain discovery.  (Creed-21 v. City of Wildomar (2017) 18 Cal.App.5th 690, 702; Lang v. Hochman (2000) 77 Cal.App.4th 1225, 1246.)  Nonmonetary sanctions require evidence of willful violations of discovery orders or a history of egregious abuses of discovery.  (R.S. Creative, Inc. v. Creative Cotton, Ltd. (1999) 75 Cal.App.4th 486.)  A prerequisite to the imposition of nonmonetary sanctions is willful disobedience of a court order.  (New Albertsons, Inc. v. Superior Court (2008) 168 Cal.App.4th 1403.)  By requiring a violation of a discovery order before imposing nonmonetary sanctions, California courts can be sure that the offending party does not intend to comply with the discovery request.  (Ruvalcaba v. Government Employees Insurance Co. (1990) 222 Cal.App.3d 1579, 1581.)  “[A] terminating sanction issued solely because of a failure to pay a monetary discovery sanction is never justified.”  (Newland v. Superior Court (1995) 40 Cal.App.4th 608, 615.)

          Petitioner moves for terminating sanctions on the grounds Respondent has failed to produce discovery responses in violation of this Court’s order, and such a failure to produce responses has prevented Petitioner from preparing for arbitration or defend against Respondent’s claims.  (Decl. of Reader ¶7; Motion, pg. 6; Creed-21, 18 Cal.App.5th at pg. 702.)

          The Court finds Petitioner is not entitled to an order granting terminating sanctions against Respondent.  Notwithstanding Respondent’s failure to timely provide complete responses to Petitioner’s discovery, there is no evidence that less severe sanctions would not produce compliance with the discovery rules.  (Mileikowsky, 128 Cal.App.4th at pgs. 279-280.)  Further, Petitioner failed to produce evidence demonstrating Respondent acted willfully in violating this Court’s order.  (R.S. Creative, Inc., 75 Cal.App.4th at pg. 486; New Albertsons, Inc., 168 Cal.App.4th a at pg. 1403.) 

Based on the foregoing, Petitioner’s motion for terminating sanctions is denied.     

Monetary Sanctions

In addition to or in lieu of any other sanction, the court may order the disobedient party or counsel responsible or both to pay the reasonable expenses, including attorney fees, incurred as a result of the failure to obey (including fees on the sanctions motion).  (C.C.P. §2023.030(a); see Marriage of Niklas (1989) 211 Cal.App.3d 28, 37-38 [holding declarations did not show fees were for services related to opposing party’s failure to comply with prior orders].)

Petitioner requests monetary sanctions in the amount of $490.00 against Respondent and her counsel of record incurred from reasonable expenses, attorneys’ fees, and costs in connection with the preparation, filing, and service of the instant motion.  Petitioner’s counsel declares “reasonable compensation is $215.00 per hour,” which the Court interprets as counsel’s declaration of their hourly rate, and that counsel spent 2 hours in preparation of this motion, in addition to the filing fee of $60.00.  (Decl. of Reader ¶8.)  The Court determines Petitioner’s counsel’s hourly rate is reasonable based on the experience of the Court.  Petitioner’s request for monetary sanctions is granted in the reduced amount of $490.00 ([$215/hour x 2 hours] + $60.00).

Based on the foregoing, Petitioner’s motion for monetary sanctions against Respondent and her counsel of record is granted in the reduced amount of $490.00.  Sanctions are payable within 30 days.

Dated:  May _____, 2023

Hon. Daniel M. Crowley

Judge of the Superior Court