Judge: Stephen P. Pfahler, Case: 20CHCV00560, Date: 2022-07-29 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 20CHCV00560 Hearing Date: July 29, 2022 Dept: F49
Dept. F-49
Date: 7-29-22 c/f 7-12-22
Case # 20CHCV00560
Trial Date: 1-30-23 c/f 6-13-22
SANCTIONS
MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff, California Department of Public
Health and Bureau of Cannabis Control
RESPONDING PARTY: Unopposed/Defendant, Kushy Punch, Inc.
RELIEF REQUESTED
Motion for Issue and Evidentiary, and Additional Monetary
Sanctions
SUMMARY OF ACTION
On September 23, 2020, the California Department of
Public Health and Bureau of Cannabis Control filed a complaint for civil
penalties. Plaintiff alleges Defendants engaged in unlicensed commercial
cannabis activities in the cities of Gardena and Canoga Park. On March 1, 2021,
Defendants answered the complaint.
RULING: Granted
Plaintiff California Department of Public Health and Bureau
of Cannabis Control moves for the imposition of issue and evidentiary, plus
additional monetary sanctions against defendant Kushy Punch, Inc., due to the
failure of defendant to comply with the March 16, 2022 order compelling further
responses to request for production of documents, request for admissions, and
form interrogatories. Plaintiff also moves to deem request for admissions
admitted.
The court considers the motion for evidentiary and issue
sanctions. “Discovery
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.’” (Young v. Rosenthal (1989) 212 Cal.App.3d 96, 118-119
citing Deyo v. Kilbourne (1978) 84 Cal.App.3d 771, 793; Newland v. Superior Court (1995) 40
Cal.App.4th 608, 613.) A prerequisite to the imposition of the dismissal
sanction is that the party has willfully failed to comply with a court order. (Mileikowsky v. Tenet Healthsystem (2005)
128 Cal.App.4th 262, 279-280; Laguna Auto
Body v. Farmers Ins. Exchange (1991) 231 Cal.App.3d 481, 487 overruled on
other grounds in Garcia v. McCutchen
(1997) 16 Cal.4th 469, 478, fn. 4.); Young
v. Rosenthal (1989) 212 Cal.App.3d 96, 114.)
Evidence or issue sanctions may be imposed only after
parties violated discovery orders compelling further responses, except in
exceptional circumstances, including where there was sufficiently egregious
misconduct regarding a failure to respond to discovery, or a prior discovery
order would be futile. (New Albertsons,
Inc. v. Sup. Ct. (2008) 168 Cal.App.4th 1403, 1428.) To avoid sanctions,
the burden of proving that a discovery violation was not willful is on the
party on whom the discovery was served. (Cornwall
v. Santa Monica Dairy Co. (1977) 66 Cal.App.3d 250, 252- 253.)
The underlying motion to compel was unopposed, and the
subject motion remains unopposed. Defendant has apparently abandoned the action
and/or demonstrates no intent to comply with the court order. The motion for
evidentiary and issues sanctions is therefore granted as to the interrogatories
and documents only. Defendant is precluded from introducing any evidence
regarding the subject matter of the outstanding discovery.
On the admissions, Code of Civil Procedure section
2033.290, subd. (e), NOT subdivision (a)(1-2), as presented in the points and
authorities [12:4-12] presents a basis to deem admissions admitted upon the
violation of an order compelling responses. “If a party then fails to obey an order
compelling further response to requests for admission, the court may order that
the matters involved in the requests be deemed admitted. In lieu of, or in
addition to, this order, the court may impose a monetary sanction under Chapter
7 (commencing with Section 2023.010).” The motion to deem admissions is
also granted. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.290, subd. (e).)
The court may impose additional monetary sanctions. (Code
Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.300, subd. (d), 2031.300, subd. (c), 2033.300, subd. (d).) Additional
joint and several monetary sanctions in the amount of $125 against Kushy
Punch, Inc., and
counsel of record to be paid within 30 days for the documents and
interrogatories only. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.290, subd. (c) and 2031.300,
subd. (c).) The court elects to deem the admitted admissions sufficient “in
lieu” of additional monetary sanctions, and additionally declines to award
additional monetary sanctions for work not presented to the court in the
written motion.
Next motion for sanctions on August 1, 2022.
Defendants to give notice.