Judge: Michelle C. Kim, Case: 20STCV45380, Date: 2023-12-15 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 20STCV45380    Hearing Date: March 5, 2024    Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA  

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT 

 

CHAD TEWKSBERRY, 

Plaintiff(s),  

vs. 

 

TJX INC, ET AL., 

 

Defendant(s). 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

      CASE NO: 20STCV45380 

 

[TENTATIVE] ORDER DENYING MOTION TO ENFORCE COURT ORDER   

 

Dept. 31 

1:30 p.m.  

March 5, 2024 

 

On November 25, 2020, Plaintiff Chad Tewksberry (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against defendants TJX Inc., TJX Companies, Inc., and Marshalls of CA, LLC erroneously sued as Marshall's Department Stores of California, Inc. (“Marshalls”) damages arising from a slip and fall.   

 

At this time, Marshalls moves to enforce a Court order and for monetary sanctions against Plaintiff. Any opposition was due on or before February 21, 2024; none was filed.  

 

Marshalls asserts that on March 14, 2023, the Court issued an order granting Marshalls’ motions to compel against Plaintiff and imposing sanctions against Plaintiff’s counsel only in the amount of $960.00.  Plaintiff’s counsel was ordered to pay the sanctions within 20 days, but Marshalls avers that the sanctions have not been paid.  Marshalls requests the Court order Plaintiff’s counsel to comply with the previous order imposing the sanction and to impose additional monetary sanctions for this motion.    

 

Marshalls cites CCP §§ 2023.010, 2023.030, 2024.050, and 2025.450. However, these code sections pertain to failure to provide or properly respond to discovery, not a failure to pay monetary sanctions. There is no argument here that Plaintiff had failed to serve discovery. More importantly, there is no authority, and Marshalls cites none, for imposition of sanctions for failure to pay sanctions. (See Newland v. Superior Court (1995) 40 Cal.App.4th 608, 615 [holding, “a terminating sanction issued solely because of a failure to pay a monetary discovery sanction is never justified.”].)  Sanctions orders are enforceable as money judgments unless the court orders otherwise.  Thus, the remedy to enforce payment of monetary sanctions is to obtain and levy a writ of execution on assets of the debtor. (Ibid.)   

 

Based on the foregoing, Marshalls’ motion is denied.   

 

Moving party is ordered to give notice.   

 

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE: 

  • Parties are encouraged to meet and confer after reading this tentative ruling to see if they can reach an agreement. 

  • If a party intends to submit on this tentative ruling,¿the party must send an email to the court at¿sscdept31@lacourt.org¿with the Subject line “SUBMIT” followed by the case number.¿ The body of the email must include the hearing date and time, counsel’s contact information, and the identity of the party submitting.¿¿ 

  • Unless¿all¿parties submit by email to this tentative ruling, the parties should arrange to appear remotely (encouraged) or in person for oral argument.¿ You should assume that others may appear at the hearing to argue.¿¿ 

  • If the parties neither submit nor appear at hearing, the Court may take the motion off calendar or adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the Court.¿ After the Court has issued a tentative ruling, the Court may prohibit the withdrawal of the subject motion without leave.¿ 

 

Dated this 4th day of March 2024 

 

  

 

 

Hon. Michelle C. Kim 

Judge of the Superior Court