2012-00136405-CU-DF

Carlos Gonzales vs. Yeanina Oliva

Nature of Proceeding: Motion for Terminating Sanctions

Filed By: Gonzales, Carlos

Plaintiff’s Motion for Terminating Sanctions as to defendant Richard Menard is
unopposed but is denied. Plaintiff’s alternative motion for issue and evidentiary
sanctions is denied for failure to provide the required CRC 3.1345 separate statement.

Plaintiff’s alternative motion for monetary sanctions for failure to obey court order of
January 13, 2014 is granted in the requested amount of $300.

The Court again orders that Defendant Menard provide verified further responses to
the requests for admission and form interrogatories on or before April 11, 2014.
Failure to obey this court order may lead to additional sanctions including monetary,
issue, evidentiary, and/or terminating sanctions.

On January 13, 2014 the Court granted plaintiff’s three discovery motions pertaining to
Richard Menard. Defendant was ordered to provide verified responses to the three
sets of discovery on or before January 27. Defendant provided a verified further
response only as to the Special Interrogatories, which are not the subject of this
motion. (See moving papers page 8) Defendant provided no further responses as to
the requests for admissions and form interrogatories.

The Court denies terminating sanctions. Defendant complied with one of the court
orders of January 13, 2014. The court cannot determine at this stage whether the
failure to comply with the two other orders is sufficient to award the ultimate
terminating sanction at this time. The discovery sanction cannot put the propounding
party in a better position than they would have been in if they had received the
discovery. Puritan Insurance Co. v Superior Court (1985) 171 Cal.App.3d 877, 884.
Since defendant has at least provided responses to the special interrogatories, it
appears a terminating sanction would put plaintiff in a better position.
The motion for issue and evidentiary sanctions is denied as it was not accompanied by
the required CRC rule 3.1345 separate statement.

The Court grants monetary sanctions in the requested amount of $300 on the ground
defendant wilfully failed to obey the court orders concerning the requests for admission
and form interrogatories. CCP 2033.290(e);2030.290(c).
Defendant Richard Menard failed to obey the court orders because he did not serve
verified further responses to the form interrogatories and requests for admissions.

If pro se litigants actually incur expenses for computer-assisted legal research, or
photocopying, or transportation to and from court, or any other identifiable item, there
is no reason those expenses cannot be recovered as discovery sanctions. Kravitz v.
Superior Court (2001) 91 Cal. App. 4th 1015, 1020 -1021.

The sanctions in the amount of $300 are to be paid by defendant Menard to plaintiff on
or before April 22, 2014. If the sanctions are not paid by that date the plaintiff may
prepare a formal order for the sanctions award as set forth below.

As for the monetary sanctions that were ordered to be paid on January 13, 2014,
defendant has failed to pay the sanctions by the required due date of February 13,
2014. (See minute orders, Ex. B and C to Declaration of Gonzales) Because the
sanctions have not been paid in a reasonable time, the Court orders that the sanctions
are immediately due and payable. Plaintiff may prepare for the court’s signature a
proposed formal order awarding $400 in monetary sanctions, payable to plaintiff by
defendant Richard Menard to plaintiff. The order may be enforced as a judgment. See
Newland v Superior Court (1995) 40 Cal.App.4th 608, 610,

As for this motion, the minute order is effective immediately. No formal order pursuant
to CRC Rule 3.1312 or further notice is required.