Judge: William A. Crowfoot, Case: 19STCV45414, Date: 2022-08-15 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 19STCV45414    Hearing Date: August 15, 2022    Dept: 27

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

 

GREGORY LANGADINOS,

                   Plaintiff(s),

          vs.

 

RONALD MACDONALD, et al.,

 

                   Defendant(s).

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

      CASE NO.: 19STCV45414

 

[TENTATIVE] ORDER RE: DEFENDANT RONALD S. MACDONALD’S MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER RE: PLAINTIFF’S CONDUCT AND COMMUNICATIONS TO DEFENDANT’S COUNSEL; REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS

 

Dept. 27

1:30 p.m.

August 15, 2022

 

On December 16, 2019, plaintiff Gregory Langadinos (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against defendants Ronald S. MacDonald (“Defendant”) and Monica K. Kramer (“Kramer”) (collectively, “Defendants”) asserting a cause of action for motor vehicle negligence.  Kramer was dismissed from this action on May 11, 2021.  On June 9, 2022, Defendant filed this motion for a protective order regarding Plaintiff’s conduct and communications to defense counsel pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 128.  Defendant also requests monetary sanctions against Plaintiff in the amount of $1,635.   

“A trial court is empowered to exercise its supervisory power in such a manner as to provide for the orderly conduct of the court's business and to ‘guard against inept procedures and unnecessary indulgences which would tend to hinder, hamper or delay the conduct and dispatch of its proceedings.’”  (Ellis v. Roshei Corp. (1983) 143 Cal.app.3d 624, 649 [citing People v. Mattson (1959) 51 Cal.2d 777, 792.)  Section 128 of the Code of Civil Procedure provides that “[e]very court shall have the power to . . . provide for the orderly conduct of proceedings before it, or its officers.”  (Code Civ. Proc., § 128, subd. (a)(3).) 

Defendant presents a collection of emails from Plaintiff which objectively demonstrate that Plaintiff’s conduct falls notably short of the standards of civility set forth in the California Rules of Professional Conduct and the Los Angeles County and State Bar of California’s guidelines for civility and professionalism.  The Court declines to repeat the content of those offensive statements by Plaintiff in its ruling. 

Accordingly, Defendant’s motion is GRANTED in part.  Plaintiff is ordered to pay sanctions in the amount of $1,635 within 20 days.  Plaintiff is further admonished for his unprofessional conduct and communications and ordered to comport himself in accordance with the California Rules of Professional Conduct as well as all other applicable rules and guidelines governing the conduct of attorneys, which equally apply to him as a self-represented litigant.  (See, e.g., Kobayashi v Superior Court (2009) 175 Cal.App.4th 536, 543; Rappleyea v. Campbell (1994) 8 Cal.4th 975, 984–985.) 

 

 

Moving party to give notice.

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at SSCDEPT27@lacourt.org indicating intention to submit on the tentative as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org.  Please be advised that if you submit on the tentative and elect not to appear at the hearing, the opposing party may nevertheless appear at the hearing and argue the matter.  Unless you receive a submission from all other parties in the matter, you should assume that others might appear at the hearing to argue.  If the Court does not receive emails from the parties indicating submission on this tentative ruling and there are no appearances at the hearing, the Court may, at its discretion, adopt the tentative as the final order or place the motion off calendar.