Judge: Michelle C. Kim, Case: 21STCV37401, Date: 2023-10-18 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV37401    Hearing Date: October 18, 2023    Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA  

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT 

 

ROBERT BRAGG, 

Plaintiff(s),  

vs. 

 

CITY OF LOS ANGELES, ET AL., 

 

Defendant(s). 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

      CASE NO: 21STCV37401 

 

[TENTATIVE] ORDER RE: MOTION FOR TERMINATING SANCTIONS 

 

Dept. 31 

1:30 p.m.  

October 18, 2023 

 

On October 12, 2021, Plaintiff Robert Bragg (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Defendants City of Los Angeles and County of Los Angeles for injuries Plaintiff sustained after tripping and falling on a sidewalk. On April 7, 2022, Plaintiff dismissed the County of Los Angeles. The City of Los Angeles (“Defendant”) is the only remaining named Defendant.   

 

Plaintiff previously moved for terminating sanctions against Defendant for disobeying the Court’s March 10, 2023 order compelling the depositions of Defendant’s person most qualified (“PMQ”) for Bureau of Street Services and Urban Forestry divisions, and for previously failing to produce the PMQ on March 16, 2022 and July 14, 2022. The Court denied the motion, but placed Defendant on notice that any future violations of the Court’s discovery orders may result in evidence, issue, or, if warranted, terminating sanctions. (Min. Order, June 6, 2023.) 

 

Plaintiff again moves for issue sanctions establishing Defendant’s liability for the subject incident, or in the alternative terminating sanctions against Defendant to strike Defendant’s Answer for failing to comply with the Court’s February 24, 2023 and June 6, 2023 Orders compelling the depositions of Defendant’s PMQ and production of documents.  

 

Any opposition was due on or before October 5, 2023; none was filed. 

 

However, before even reaching the merits of Plaintiff’s motion, the Court notes that Plaintiff’s proof of service is defective. The instant motion is filed as “Plaintiff’s Notice and Motion for Issue Sanctions, Terminating Sanctions, and/or to Strike the Answer of Defendant, City of Los Angeles, Memorandum of Points and Authorities in support thereof; Declaration of Timothy Mitchell; [Proposed] Order.” Instead, Plaintiff’s proof of service on Defendant provides that the documents served were “Plaintiff’s Notice and Motion for Discovery Sanctions; [Proposed] Order.”  

 

It is not apparent that proper service was effectuated when the documents served upon Defendant are drastically different from the instant motion.  

 

Based on the foregoing, the motion is denied without prejudice. 

 

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 17th day of October, 2023 

 

  

 

 

Hon. Michelle C. Kim 

Judge of the Superior Court