Judge: Peter A. Hernandez, Case: 20STCV07743, Date: 2024-08-26 Tentative Ruling
The Court often posts its tentative several days in advance of the hearing. Please re-check the tentative rulings the day before the hearing to be sure that the Court has not revised the ruling since the time it was posted.
Please call the clerk at (213) 633-0154 by 4:00 pm. the court day before the hearing if you wish to submit on the tentative.
Case Number: 20STCV07743 Hearing Date: August 26, 2024 Dept: 34
TENTATIVE RULING:
The Motion for Terminating Sanctions
is GRANTED in part.
BACKGROUND:
On February
27, 2020, Plaintiff Felicia McCarron filed her Complaint against Defendant
Sisyphian, LLC on causes of action arising from Plaintiff’s employment with
Defendant.
On November
17, 2020, the court granted a motion to compel arbitration as to certain causes
of action. However, on July 25, 2023, the parties submitted a “Joint Status
Report Re: Mediation,” in which the court was informed that instead of arbitration,
the parties elected to pursue mediation. The matter did not resolve at
mediation and, as a result, the parties proceeded with discovery.
On December
7, 2023, the Court granted Plaintiff’s Counsel’s motion to be relieved as
counsel.
On February
26, 2024, the Court granted multiple discovery motions filed by Defendant.
On May 24,
2024, Defendant filed its Motion for Terminating Sanctions, or, Alternatively,
for Issue and/or Evidentiary Sanctions, and for Monetary Sanctions (“Motion for
Terminating Sanctions”). In support of its Motion for Terminating Sanctions,
Defendant concurrently filed: (1) Separate Statement; and (2) Proposed Order.
A Jury Trial is set for August 26, 2024. Plaintiff has
not opposed or otherwise responded to the Motion for Terminating Sanctions.
ANALYSIS:
I.
Legal Standard
Code of Civil Procedure section 2023.030 gives
the court the discretion to impose sanctions against anyone engaging in a
misuse of the discovery process. A court may impose terminating sanctions by
striking pleadings of the party engaged in misuse of discovery or entering
default judgment. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2023.030, subd. (d).) A violation of a
discovery order is sufficient for the imposition of terminating sanctions. (Collison
& Kaplan v. Hartunian (1994) 21 Cal.App.4th 1611, 1620.) Terminating
sanctions are appropriate when a party persists in disobeying the court's
orders. (Deyo v. Kilbourne (1978) 84 Cal.App.3d 771, 795–796.)
A terminating sanction is a "drastic
measure which should be employed with caution." (Deyo, supra,
at p. 793.)
"A decision to order terminating
sanctions should not be made lightly. But where a violation is willful,
preceded by a history of abuse, and the evidence shows that less severe
sanctions would not produce compliance with the discovery rules, the trial
court is justified in imposing the ultimate sanction." (Mileikowsky v.
Tenet Healthsystem (2005) 128 Cal.App.4th 262, 279–280.)
While the court has discretion to impose
terminating sanctions, these sanctions "should be appropriate to the
dereliction and should not exceed that which is required to protect the
interests of the party entitled to but denied discovery." (Deyo, supra,
84 Cal.App.3d at p. 793.) "[A] court is empowered to apply the ultimate
sanction against a litigant who persists in the outright refusal to comply with
his discovery obligations." (Id.) Discovery sanctions are not to be
imposed for punishment, but instead are used to encourage fair disclosure of
discovery to prevent unfairness resulting for the lack of information. (See Midwife
v. Bernal (1988) 203 Cal.App.3d 57, 64 [superseded on other grounds as
stated in Kohan v. Cohan (1991) 229 Cal.App.3d 967, 971.)
"A trial court has broad discretion to
impose discovery sanctions, but two facts are generally prerequisite to the
imposition of nonmonetary sanctions . . . (1) absent unusual circumstances,
there must be a failure to comply with a court order, and (2) the failure must
be willful." (Biles v. Exxon Mobil Corp. (2004) 124 Cal.App.4th
1315, 1327; but see Reedy v. Bussell (2007) 148 Cal.App.4th 1272, 1291
["willfulness is no longer a requirement for the imposition of discovery
sanctions."].)
II. Discussion
Defendant moves the Court to issue
terminating sanctions by striking Plaintiff’s Complaint and dismissing the
action with prejudice. (Motion for Terminating Sanctions, p. 29:1–3.) Defendant
alternatively requests evidentiary and issue sanctions. (Id. at p.
29:3–4.) Defendant further requests monetary sanctions. (Id. at p.
29:5.)
Defendant argues that these
sanctions are warranted because: (1) Plaintiff has not met and conferred in
good faith; (2) Plaintiff has not fulfilled her discovery obligations; and (3)
Plaintiff has not complied with the Court’s Minute Order dated February 26,
2024. (Motion for Terminating Sanctions, p. 24:1–5.)
According to Defense Counsel,
Plaintiff has not sat for her court-ordered deposition or provided Defendant
with court-ordered discovery responses. (Motion for Terminating Sanctions,
Decl. Garofalo, ¶ 10.)
There is no evidence before the
Court that indicates Plaintiff has sat for a deposition, served discovery
responses, or otherwise complied with the Court’s Minute Order dated February
26, 2024. There is also no indication that any sanction would result in
Plaintiff serving responses to Defendant’s outstanding discovery requests.
Rather, considering that Plaintiff has repeatedly failed to serve timely
responses, has repeatedly chosen not to respond to motions, and has not even
responded to this motion for terminating sanctions, it appears that Plaintiff
has ceased participating in this case.
The Court GRANTS in part the motion and ISSUES terminating sanctions. However, given that Plaintiff has been litigating this matter in propria persona since December 2023, monetary sanctions would not be appropriate here. The Court DENIES the request for monetary sanctions.
III. Conclusion
The Motion for Terminating Sanctions
is GRANTED in part.
Defendant Sisyphian, LLC is STRICKEN from the
Complaint. Plaintiff’s Complaint is DISMISSED with prejudice.
The Motion for Terminating Sanctions
is DENIED as to all else.