Case Number: BC651693 Hearing Date: February 06, 2020 Dept: 2

Vann et al. v. Giles

Defendant’s Motion for Terminating Sanctions for Failure to Obey Court Orders and for Monetary Sanctions filed on 9/30/19 is DENIED without prejudice.

On 7/31/19, the Court granted Defendant’s motions to compel Plaintiffs’ responses to discovery. Motion, Ex. A. Plaintiffs were ordered to provide verified responses within 30 days and pay sanctions of $1,200 to Defendant. Id. Defendant served a Notice of Ruling on Plaintiffs on 7/31/19. Id. Plaintiffs did not comply with the Court’s order. Declaration of Elizabeth Chidi, ¶ 9.

Defendant now seeks terminating sanctions. The Court is extremely troubled by Plaintiffs’ failure to comply with the Court’s order. However, “terminating sanctions are to be used sparingly because of the drastic effect of their application.” Department of Forestry & Fire Protection v. Howell (2017) 18 Cal. App. 5th 154, 191-92.

Sanctions are generally imposed in an incremental approach, with terminating sanctions being the last resort. Department of Forestry & Fire Protection v. Howell (2017) 18 Cal. App. 5th 154, 191-92. Applying the incremental approach, the Court concludes that further monetary sanctions are warranted at this juncture.

The Court imposes additional monetary sanctions in the amount of $555.00 against Plaintiffs to be paid within 30 days.

Plaintiffs are admonished that they must comply with the Court’s previous orders to provide written, verified responses to avoid further sanctions, up to and including terminating sanctions resulting in the dismissal of Plaintiffs’ case. If Plaintiffs fail to comply within the next 20 days, Defendant may renew the motion for terminating sanctions.

Moving party is ordered to give notice.