Judge Timothy B. Taylor, Case 37-2021-00050109-CU-PO-CTL 2023-09-08 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Timothy B. Taylor, Case: 37-2021-00050109-CU-PO-CTL, Date: 2023-09-08 Tentative Ruling

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,

DEPT.:

EVENT DATE:

EVENT TIME:

HALL OF JUSTICE

TENTATIVE RULINGS - September 07, 2023

09/08/2023 01:30:00 PM C-72 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

JUDICIAL OFFICER:Timothy Taylor

CASE NO.:

CASE CATEGORY:

EVENT TYPE:

CASE TITLE: CASE TYPE:

Civil - Unlimited PI/PD/WD - Other Motion Hearing (Civil) 37-2021-00050109-CU-PO-CTL RAHMATI VS STARBUCKS CORPORATION [IMAGED] CAUSAL DOCUMENT/DATE FILED: Motion for Terminating Sanctions, 08/11/2023

Tentative Ruling on Motion for Terminating Sanctions Rahmati v. Starbucks, Case No. 2021-50109 September 8, 2023, 1:30 p.m., Dept. 72 1. Overview and Procedural Posture.

This is a personal injury case arising from a hot beverage spill at the Starbucks in Del Mar in February of 2020. The complaint was filed in late 2021. Starbucks answered in February, 2022. ROA 11. At the due-course CMC in May of 2022, the court set the case for trial in May of 2023. ROA 17-22. Obviously, this plan for the resolution of the case did not bear fruit. For further background, the court incorporates the minutes for May 19 and June 16, 2023. On those dates, following the withdrawal of plaintiffs' former counsel (ROA 84-86), the court made certain orders regarding discovery.* ROA 91, 101.

None of the court's discovery orders have been obeyed. Accordingly, Starbucks now seeks the imposition of terminating sanctions. ROA 108-113. There is no opposition.

2. Applicable Standards.

California discovery law authorizes a range of penalties for a party's refusal to obey a discovery order, including monetary sanctions, evidentiary sanctions, issue sanctions, and terminating sanctions. Lopez v. Watchtower Bible & Tract Society of New York, Inc. (2016) 246 Cal.App.4th 566, 604. While a trial court has broad discretion in selecting the appropriate penalty, the discovery statutes evince an incremental approach, starting with monetary sanctions and ending with the ultimate sanction of termination. Doppes v. Bentley Motors, Inc. (2009) 174 Cal.App.4th 967, 992. 'If a lesser sanction fails to curb misuse, a greater sanction is warranted: continuing misuses of the discovery process warrant incrementally harsher sanctions until the sanction is reached that will curb the abuse.' Id. '[T]he sanction chosen should not provide a windfall to the other party, by putting the prevailing party in a better position than if he or she had obtained the discovery sought and it had been favorable.' Rutledge v. Hewlett-Packard Co. (2015) 238 Cal.App.4th 1164, 1193.

3. Discussion and Ruling.

Calendar No.: Event ID: TENTATIVE RULINGS

2994582 39 CASE NUMBER: CASE TITLE: RAHMATI VS STARBUCKS CORPORATION [IMAGED] 37-2021-00050109-CU-PO-CTL The unopposed motion for terminating sanctions is denied without prejudice.

'[T]he terminating sanction is a drastic penalty and should be used sparingly.' Lopez, supra, 246 Cal.App.4th at 604. It should generally not be imposed until the court has 'attempted less severe alternatives and found them to be unsuccessful and/or the record clearly shows lesser sanctions would be ineffective.' Id. In this case, while it is undisputed that plaintiffs failed to comply with the court's May 19 and June 16 discovery orders, the court has not attempted lesser sanctions and found them to be ineffective. Nor has Starbucks has shown that lesser sanctions would be futile. Accordingly, the terminating sanctions request is premature.

Moreover, because Starbucks did not move for monetary, evidentiary, and/or issue sanctions in the alternative, the court is unable to impose such lesser sanctions at this time. 'A request for a sanction shall, in the notice of motion, identify every person, party, and attorney against whom the sanction is sought, and specify the type of sanction sought.' Code Civ. Proc. § 2023.040 (emphasis added).

The TRC is confirmed for October 27, 2023, as is the jury trial for November 9, 2023. ROA 99-100. If plaintiffs fail to appear for the TRC, the court will consider setting an OSC re dismissal.

___________________________ *That withdrawal is now complete. ROA 106-107.

Calendar No.: Event ID: TENTATIVE RULINGS

2994582 39