Case Number: LC097209    Hearing Date: August 13, 2014    Dept: 92

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES – CENTRAL DISTRICT

MAHSA MOAYYED MOHSENI,
Plaintiff(s),
vs.

MAHMOOD DAEMI, et al.,
Defendant(s).

Case No.: LC097209

[TENTATIVE] ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR TERMINATING SANCTIONS

Dept. 92
August 13, 2014
1:30 p.m. — #23

Defendant, Mahmood Daemi’s Motion for Terminating Sanctions is Granted. Plaintiff and her attorney of record, jointly and severally, are ordered to pay sanctions to Defendant, by and through counsel of record, in the amount of $1377.50.

1. Facts
Plaintiff, Mahsa Moayyed Mohseni filed this action against Defendant, Mahmood Daemi for damages arising out of an automobile accident.

2. Discovery History
The Court has previously granted multiple discovery motions in Defendant’s favor and against Plaintiff in this action. On 7/24/13, the Court granted a motion to compel Plaintiff to attend her deposition. On 4/18/14, the Court granted a motion to compel Plaintiff to respond to RPDs. On 6/27/14, the Court granted Defendant’s motion to compel responses to special interrogatories.

3. Motion for Terminating Sanctions
At this time, Defendant moves for terminating sanctions, contending Plaintiff has failed to respond to the RPDs or the special interrogatories, and has not paid sanctions. Defendant also contends Plaintiff failed to appear at her duly noticed IME, and has not responded to additional discovery that has been propounded recently.

Pursuant to Deyo v. Kilbourne (1978) 84 Cal.App.3d 771, 776, the Court should typically impose lesser sanctions prior to awarding terminating sanctions. However, there are circumstances where imposition of terminating sanctions is appropriate without first imposing issue and/or evidentiary sanctions. See Laguna Auto Body v. Farmers Ins. Exch. (1991) 231 Cal.App.3d 481, 490-91.

Terminating sanctions are imposed at this time for three reasons. First, the Court previously imposed monetary sanctions, which have not been paid. Second, the outstanding discovery, including the IME, goes to the “heart” of Plaintiff’s case, and therefore an issue or evidentiary sanction would be tantamount to a terminating sanction. Third, Plaintiff has not opposed this motion and appears to have abandoned the case.

The motion for terminating sanctions is therefore granted.

4. Monetary Sanctions
Defendant also seeks monetary sanctions in connection with the motion. The amount sought is reasonable, with the exception of 1.5 hours to prepare a reply to the opposition; no opposition was filed, so no reply was necessary. The Court therefore reduces the sanctions sought from $1595 to $1377.50. Plaintiff and her attorney of record, jointly and severally, are ordered to pay sanctions to Defendant, by and through counsel of record, in the amount of $1377.50.

Dated this 13th day of August, 2014

Hon. Elia Weinbach
Judge of the Superior Court