Judge: Michael T. Smyth, Case: 37-2021-00052693-CU-BC-CTL, Date: 2024-02-23 Tentative Ruling

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,

DEPT.:

EVENT DATE:

EVENT TIME:

HALL OF JUSTICE

TENTATIVE RULINGS - February 22, 2024

02/23/2024  09:00:00 AM  C-67 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

JUDICIAL OFFICER:Michael T. Smyth

CASE NO.:

CASE CATEGORY:

EVENT TYPE:

CASE TITLE: CASE TYPE:

Civil - Unlimited  Breach of Contract/Warranty Motion Hearing (Civil) 37-2021-00052693-CU-BC-CTL AMERICAN DRIVING RECORDS INC VS TERRA NOVA INSURANCE AND MULTI-SERVICE CENTER [IMAGED] CAUSAL DOCUMENT/DATE FILED: Motion for Terminating Sanctions, 01/30/2024

The court is prepared to grant the motion upon the Plaintiff's counsel producing a proof of service showing that the motion for terminating sanctions was served and filing that proof of service. (See Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 3.1300(c) ['Proof of service of the moving papers must be filed no later than five court days before the time appointed for the hearing.'].) No proof appears to be attached to the moving papers. (See ROA 163, 164, 165.) The court is authorized to impose terminating and monetary sanctions on parties who misuse the discovery process (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2023.030(a), (d)), including disobeying a court order to provide discovery (id., § 2023.010(f); see also Miranda v. 21st Century Ins. Co. (2004) 117 Cal.App.4th 913, 928 ['Disobedience of a court order constitutes an abuse of discovery for which the court may dismiss the action']). Misuse of the discovery process may also include 'employing a discovery method in a manner or to an extent that causes unwarranted annoyance, embarrassment, or oppression, or undue burden and expense,' 'failing to respond or to submit to an authorized method of discovery,' and 'making an evasive response to discovery.' (Id., §§ 2023.010(b), (c), (d), (f).) Terminating sanctions are appropriate where a party's discovery abuses and failures to follow court orders are repeated or willful. (See Miranda, supra, 117 Cal.App.4th at 928-929 ['Only two facts are absolutely prerequisite to imposition of the sanction: (1) there must be a failure to comply . . . and (2) the failure must be willful.'] [internal citation and quotation marks omitted]; see also Jerry's Shell v. Equilon Enterprises, LLC (2005) 134 Cal.App.4th 1058, 1069 ['Repeated failure to respond to discovery and to comply with court orders compelling discovery provides ample grounds for imposition of the ultimate sanction.'].) Given that the court has now ruled on two sets of four discovery motions and explicitly invited a motion for terminating sanctions should Defendant fail to participate in the litigation, terminating sanctions are now warranted.

Plaintiff is ordered to submit a formal order, revised to reflect that the matter has been reassigned to Judge Smyth.

Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

3091708  6