Judge: Melvin D. Sandvig, Case: 23CHCV02724, Date: 2025-02-10 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 23CHCV02724 Hearing Date: February 10, 2025 Dept: F47
Dept. F47
Date: 2/10/25
TRIAL DATE: 9/29/25
Case #23CHCV02724
MOTION FOR
TERMINATING SANCTIONS
Motions filed on 6/26/24.
MOVING PARTY: Defendant Costco Wholesale Corporation
RESPONDING PARTY: Plaintiff Maria Pina
NOTICE: ok
RULING:
SUMMARY OF ACTION & PROCEDURAL HISTORY
This action arises from an alleged slip and fall incident
that occurred on 8/31/22 on the sales floor at the Costco Warehouse in
Northridge, California. On 9/11/23,
Plaintiff Maria Pina (Plaintiff) filed this action against Defendant Costco
Wholesale Corporation (Defendant) for
premises liability
based on negligence. On 9/21/23,
Defendant answered the complaint and propounded Form Interrogatories (General),
Set 1; Requests for Production of Documents, Set 1; and Special
Interrogatories, Set 1, on Plaintiff. (See
Bell Decl.).
After Plaintiff failed to serve responses to the
discovery by the statutory deadline, on 10/31/23, Defendant sent meet and
confer correspondence to Plaintiff’s counsel requesting responses by
11/7/23. (Bell Decl.). Plaintiff did not serve responses or request
an extension of time to respond. (Bell
Decl.). Therefore, on 11/29/23,
Defendant filed and served the motions seeking:
(1) An order compelling Plaintiff to provide verified
responses to Defendant’s Form Interrogatories, Set 1 (General) served by mail
on 9/21/23, without objection, within 10 days
of the hearing on the motion.
Additionally, Defendant requests sanctions be imposed against Plaintiff
and her attorneys of record in the amount of $511.50;
(2) An order compelling Plaintiff to provide verified
responses to Defendant’s Request for Production of Documents, Set 1 (General)
served by mail on 9/21/23, without objection, within 10 days of the hearing on the motion. Additionally, Defendant requests sanctions be
imposed against Plaintiff and her attorneys of record in the amount of $511.50;
and
(3) An order compelling Plaintiff to provide verified
responses to Defendant’s Special Interrogatories, Set 1 (General) served by
mail on 9/21/23, without objection, within 10 days of the hearing on the motion. Additionally, Defendant requests sanctions be
imposed against Plaintiff and her attorneys of record in the amount of $511.50.
Plaintiff did not oppose or otherwise respond to the
motions. On 5/3/24, the Court granted
the motions and ordered Plaintiff to serve responses without objections to the
Form Interrogatories, Special Interrogatories and Requests for Production of
Documents within 30 days. (See
5/3/24 Minute Order). The Court also
ordered Plaintiff and her attorney to pay sanctions in the total amount of
$1,225.50 within 30 days. Id. On 5/6/24, Defendant served a Notice of
Ruling which was filed with the Court on the same date.
As of the filing of this motion, Plaintiff has not served
responses. Therefore, on 6/26/24, Defendant
filed and served the instant motion seeking an order issuing terminating
sanctions and dismissing Plaintiff’s complaint in this action. Additionally, Defendant requests sanctions
against Plaintiff and her counsel in the amount of $2,110.00. Plaintiff has opposed the motion. Defendant has not filed a reply.
ANALYSIS
The Court has the authority to impose terminating
sanctions dismissing Plaintiff’s complaint based on her failure to comply with
this Court’s orders compelling Plaintiff to provide discovery responses. See CCP 2023.030(d); Collisson
& Kaplan (1994) 21 CA4th 1611, 1613-1616; Deyo (1978) 84 CA3d
771.
Additionally, the Court has the authority to impose
additional monetary sanctions on Plaintiff and her counsel for their failure to
comply with their discovery obligations and this Court’s orders. See CCP 2023.030(a).
In opposition to the motion, Plaintiff’s counsel has
submitted a declaration claiming that Plaintiff served responses, without
objections, to the subject Form Interrogatories, Special Interrogatories and
Requests for Production of Documents on 10/16/24. (See Halpern Decl. ¶3). Plaintiff’s attorney also claims that copies
of the responses are attached to the declaration. (Id. ¶4). However, copies of the responses are not
attached to Plaintiff’s counsel’s declaration.
Plaintiff’s counsel offers no explanation as to why
responses were not purportedly served until more than four months after
Plaintiff was ordered to do so by the
Court. Additionally, Plaintiff’s
counsel does not state that the sanctions ordered by the Court on 5/3/24 have
been paid.
CONCLUSION
If Defendant has received responses, without objections,
to the Form Interrogatories, Set 1, Special Interrogatories, Set 1, and
Requests for Production of Documents, the request for terminating sanctions
will be denied. If not, Plaintiff’s
counsel will have to explain to the Court why his declaration states that such
responses were served on Defendant. The
Court will then determine whether terminating sanctions are warranted.
Regardless of whether responses have been served, the
Court finds that additional monetary sanctions against Plaintiff and
Plaintiff’s counsel, Jesse L. Halpern, are warranted for their failure to
comply with their discovery obligations and this Court’s 5/3/24 order which
caused Defendant to incur additional fees and costs related to the instant
motion. The Court finds that sanctions
in the amount of $675.00 (2 hours to prepare the motion + 1 hour to prepare for
and appear at the hearing multiplied by $205.00/hour + $60.00 filing fee) are
reasonable. (See Bell Decl.
¶¶13-15). The sanctions are payable
within 30 days.