LORETTA ANDERSON,

Plaintiff,

v.

CVVG MANAGEMENT, LLC, et al., 

                       Defendants.

  Case No.:  21STCV46188

  Hearing Date:  October 28, 2022

 

     [TENTATIVE] ORDER RE:

PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SANCTIONS

BACKGROUND

On December 17, 2021, Plaintiff Loretta Anderson, through her successor in interest, Lori Brackett, filed this action against Defendants CVVG Management, LLC and Conrado Garcia, alleging elder abuse and negligent hiring. The allegations stem from injuries Plaintiff sustained while a resident at Defendants’ care facility, Jasmin Terrace, located in Bakersfield. Specifically, Plaintiff alleges that she developed pressure ulcers due to Defendants’ inadequate care. 

On September 7, 2022 the Court granted Plaintiff’s ex parte application to compel Defendant CVVG to produce original documents in its possession relating to Plaintiff by September 8. Plaintiff presently moves to impose sanctions against Defendant for failing to produce the original documents as ordered. Defendant has not filed an opposition.   

LEGAL STANDARD

“[I]f a party fails to obey an order compelling further response, the court may make those orders that are just, including the imposition of an issue sanction, an evidence sanction, or a terminating sanction . . . .” (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.310, subd. (i).) In lieu of, or in addition, the court may also impose a monetary sanction. (Ibid.) 

The discovery statutes evince an incremental approach to discovery sanctions, starting with monetary sanctions and ending with the ultimate sanction of termination. If a lesser sanction fails to curb misuse, a greater sanction is warranted: continuing misuses of the discovery process warrant incrementally harsher sanctions until the sanction is reached that will curb the abuse. (Doppes v. Bentley Motors, Inc. (2009) 174 Cal.App.4th 967, 992.) “The penalty should be appropriate to the dereliction, and should not exceed that which is required to protect the interests of the party entitled to but denied discovery.” (Wilson v. Jefferson (1985) 163 Cal.App.3d 952, 959.

DISCUSSION

With no opposition, Defendant concedes that it violated the Court’s order by failing to produce originals, and provides no substantial justification for this failure. Therefore, monetary sanctions are warranted. Nonmonetary sanctions are too drastic at this stage. 

Plaintiff’s counsel bills at rate of $425 per hour and claims approximately 2 hours of senior associate time spent on drafting the motion and supporting papers. (Garcia Decl. ¶ 9.) The filing fee was $60. This amounts to $910. Any amounts claimed above this are unreasonable given the simplicity of the motion and lack of opposition.  

CONCLUSION

Plaintiff’s motion for sanctions is GRANTED in part. Defendant CVVG is to produce originals of documents pertaining to Plaintiff within 5 days. The Court awards monetary sanctions against Defendant CVVG and its counsel of record in the amount of $910, to be paid within 30 days. Plaintiff’s request for nonmonetary sanctions is denied.