Judge: Stephen I. Goorvitch, Case: 19STCV18229, Date: 2023-05-16 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 19STCV18229    Hearing Date: May 16, 2023    Dept: 39

Justin Jennings v. Samuel Jinkyoo Kang, et al.

Case No. 19STCV18229

Motion to Compel Further Responses

            During this litigation, the Court has awarded discovery sanctions against Defendants and their counsel-of-record, the Law Offices of David S. Kim (“counsel”), jointly and severally.  Plaintiff has sought to collect those sanctions through a judgment debtor proceeding and served judgment debtor interrogatories upon counsel.  Now, Plaintiff moves to compel further responses to those interrogatories because counsel responded with boilerplate objections. 

            Counsel argues that the motion is defective because Plaintiff did not obtain an abstract of judgment or attempt to convert the Court’s order into an enforceable judgment.  Counsel is incorrect.  Plaintiff is entitled to enforce the prior sanctions order as a monetary judgment at any time.  (See Code Civ. Proc., §§ 680.230. 680.270, 699.510, subd. (a).)  Plaintiff’s counsel requests sanctions, but the Court declines to award sanctions, as this dispute appears to be based upon a good-faith dispute over the law.    

            Based upon the foregoing, the Court orders as follows:

1.         Plaintiff’s motion is granted.

2.         Counsel shall provide further responses, without objections, within thirty (30) days unless Counsel pays the sanctions on or before the due date. 

3.         Plaintiff’s request for sanctions is denied. 

4.         Plaintiff’s counsel shall provide notice and file proof of such with the Court.