Judge: William A. Crowfoot, Case: 20STCV19634, Date: 2024-12-20 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 20STCV19634    Hearing Date: December 20, 2024    Dept: 3

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - NORTHEAST DISTRICT

This action was filed on May 22, 2020, by plaintiff Linda Jean Pawlik (“Plaintiff”) against defendant Dedicato Treatment Center, Inc. (“Defendant”). On November 21, 2024, Defendant filed this motion to dismiss the Complaint, i.e., for terminating sanctions, due to Plaintiff’s failure to comply with her discovery obligations. Specifically, Defendant argues that terminating sanctions pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 2023.030 because Plaintiff has failed to produce her experts for deposition on October 17, 2024, and October 18, 2024, after the Court ordered her to do so on September 19, 2024 (“September 19 Order”).

On receipt of an expert witness list from a party, any other party may take the deposition of any person on the list. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2034.410.) The court may issue an order compelling a party or party-affiliated deponent’s attendance and testimony if the person fails to appear after being served with a deposition notice. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2025.450, subd. (a).) If the party-affiliated deponent then fails to obey the order compelling their attendance, the court may make those orders that are just, including the imposition of an issue sanction, an evidence sanction, or a terminating sanction against the party with whom the deponent is affiliated. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2025.450, subd. (h).)

Defendant argues that terminating sanctions are appropriate because it has had to file seven discovery motions during this proceeding in order to force Plaintiff to comply with her discovery obligations. In fact, on July 26, 2023, more than a year ago, the Court denied Defendant’s earlier request to terminate this action on grounds that Plaintiff should not bear the consequences for Plaintiff’s counsel’s medical issues. However, the Court cannot ignore Plaintiff’s continual failure to comply with its orders or her discovery obligations. (Manzetti v. Sup. Ct. (1993) 21 Cal.App.4th 373, 379; Liberty Mut. Fire Ins. Co. v. LcL Administrators, Inc. (2008) 163 Cal.App.4th 1093, 1106.) The Court additionally notes that for the final status conference held on December 5, 2024, the Court received trial binders only from Defendant because Defendant’s counsel was not able to obtain Plaintiff’s counsel’s cooperation in the preparation of joint binders. Plaintiff’s counsel asserted that he had a serious ongoing medical issue. Counsel and was given leave to file a declaration under seal explaining those issues. The Court further ordered joint trial binders to be delivered by December 16, 2024.

Despite the Court’s September 19 Order, Plaintiff has failed to produce her experts for their depositions. Plaintiff did not oppose this motion or file a declaration regarding her counsel’s medical issues. Nor did Plaintiff prepare trial binders in anticipation for trial as directed at the final status conference. Notwithstanding Plaintiff’s counsel assertion that he would be seeking the assistance of, or substituting in, new counsel, no such new counsel has emerged.

Based on the foregoing, it appears that Plaintiff is no longer interested in prosecuting this action. Accordingly, Defendant’s motion to dismiss is GRANTED and Plaintiff’s Complaint is hereby dismissed with prejudice.

Moving party to give notice.

Dated this 20th day of December, 2024

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at ALHDEPT3@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.