Judge Mark E. Windham, Case Number: 22STLC08434, Date: 2023-12-12 Tentative Ruling

If you desire to submit on the tentative ruling, you may do so by e-mailing Dept. 26 at the Spring Street Courthouse until the morning of the motion hearing.

The e-mail address is SSCdept26@lacourt.org

The heading on your e-mail should contain the case name, number, hearing date, and that you submit. The message should indicate your name, contact information, and the party you represent. Please note, the above e-mail address is to inform the court of your submission on the tentative ruling. All other inquiries will not receive a response.

If there are no appearances by either side and no submission on the Court's tentative ruling, the matter will be placed OFF CALENDAR.

Due to overcrowding concerns of COVID-19, all parties shall make every effort to schedule a remote appearance via LACourtConnect (https://my.lacourt.org/laccwelcome) for their next hearing. The parties shall register with LACourtConnect at least 2 hours prior to their scheduled hearing time.

Boren, Osher & Luftman, LLP v. Rose, et al.

MOTION FOR ISSUE, EVIDENTIARY, AND MONETARY SANCTIONS

(CCP § 2023.010, et al.)

Plaintiff Boren, Osher & Luftman, LLP’s Motion for Issue and/or Evidentiary Sanctions, and for the Imposition of Monetary Sanctions is GRANTED IN PART. THE REQUEST FOR ISSUE AND EVIDENCE SANCTIONS IS GRANTED AND MONETARY SANCTIONS ARE AWARDED IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,354.20.

On December 16, 2022, Plaintiff Boren, Osher & Luftman, LLP (“Plaintiff”) filed this action for breach of contract against Defendant Camilla Rose (“Defendant”). Defendant filed an answer on March 23, 2023. On December 12 and 13, 2023, the Court granted Plaintiff’s motions to compel responses to form and special interrogatories, and request for production of documents, and awarded Plaintiff monetary sanctions. (Minute Orders, 12/12/23 and 12/13/23)

Plaintiff filed the instant motion for issue, evidence, and monetary sanctions on January 11, 2024. No opposition has been filed to date.

Where a party willfully disobeys a discovery order, courts have discretion to impose terminating, issue, evidence or monetary sanctions. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2023.010, subds. (d), (g); R.S. Creative, Inc. v. Creative Cotton, Ltd. (1999) 75 Cal.App.4th 486, 495.) Here, Plaintiff requests issue and evidence sanctions with respect to the discovery requests to which Defendant was required to respond. The Court finds that notices of its rulings compelling Defendant’s responses were served on December 13, 2023 and that the responses were to be served within 20 days. (Notices of Ruling, 12/13/23.) Defendant has failed to serve responses as ordered. (Motion, Osher Decl., ¶6.) Defendant was also ordered to pay sanctions by December 26, 2022 and failed in that regard, as well. (Ibid.)

Therefore, the Court finds Defendant’s non-compliance to be willful and subject to the requested issue and evidence sanctions. Insofar as the form interrogatories sought to obtain information regarding what alleged facts from the complaint Defendant disputed, Plaintiff’s request to deem those alleged facts true is granted. The facts deemed true and undisputed are, as follows:

1. Defendant entered into a written fee agreement with Plaintiff, whereby Defendant agreed to pay Plaintiff for legal services requested by Defendant;

2. Plaintiff provided legal services for the benefit of and at the request of Defendant, for which it expected to be compensated pursuant to the parties’ written fee agreement;

3. Defendant breached her obligations under the written fee agreement with Plaintiff by failing to pay for all services that were performed by Plaintiff; and

4. Defendant was not excused from paying Plaintiff for the services that it performed pursuant to the parties’ written fee agreement.

(See Motion, p. 5:2-9.) Additionally, the Court imposes an evidence sanction prohibiting Defendant from presenting evidence in support of their affirmative defenses. In light of Defendant’s repeated failure to respond to properly served discovery, the court finds that these sanctions are appropriate pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure sections 2023.010 and 2023.030. Nor has Plaintiff filed any opposition to the motions to compel, nor to the instant Motion, to explain their failure to provide the required responses as ordered. The request for monetary sanctions is granted in the amount of $1,354.20 based on two hours of attorney time billed at $645.00 per hour, plus filing costs of $64.20. (Motion, Osher Decl., ¶12.)