Case Number: BC715361 Hearing Date: September 10, 2019 Dept: SEC

ANDERSON v. PRESBYTERIAN INTERCOMMUNITY HOSPITAL, et al.

CASE NO.: BC715361

HEARING: 9/10/19

#6

TENTATIVE ORDER

Defendant PIH Health Hospital – Whittier’s motion for terminating sanctions is DENIED.

Moving Party to give NOTICE.

Defendant PIH Health Hospital – Whittier moves for terminating sanctions per CCP 2023.030.

If anyone engages in conduct that is a misuse of the discovery process, the court may impose monetary sanction, issue sanction, evidence sanction, terminating sanction, and contempt sanction. (CCP § 2023.030.) The sanctions the court may impose are such as are suitable and necessary to enable the party seeking discovery to obtain the objects of the discovery he seeks, but the court may not impose sanctions which are designed not to accomplish the objects of discovery but to impose punishment. (Laguna Auto Body v. Farmers Ins. Exchange (1991) 231 Cal.App.3d 481, 487.) A prerequisite to the imposition of the dismissal sanction is that the party has willfully failed to comply with a court order. (Ibid.)

On 5/9/19, this court ordered Plaintiff to respond to Defendant’s discovery requests no later than 30 days from the issuance of the order. As of the date of the motion, Plaintiff failed to comply with this court’s order, and further failed to respond to the motion.

In opposition, Plaintiff’s attorney, Alaba Ajetunmobi, declares, “For a long time during the period I received the papers up till sometime before responding to this motion, I was not myself. I was going through some serious mental and physical exhaustion resulting in severe depression… because of my mental state, I just could not find the disposition to file the responses. It cannot be explained. It was a total loss of control, a state of apathy, or looking at some piece of papers and finding oneself lacking the will to act on them… I have been seeing a doctor about this. I have been taking medications. The Plaintiff is not any way to blame and should not in any way be penalized for my inaction.”

Based on Ajetunmobi’s attorney declaration of fault, the court finds that Plaintiff should not be penalized for her attorney’s inaction.

If Plaintiff’s attorney is unable to competently represent his client, he has an obligation to discuss the issue with his client, and obtain a substitution of attorney or file a motion to be relieved as counsel.

Plaintiff will be given a final opportunity to respond to the outstanding discovery within 20 days.

Monetary sanctions in the sum of $1,462.50 are imposed against Attorney Ajetnmobi, payable to Defendant PIH within 30 days. (CCP 473(b) – “the court shall, whenever relief is granted based on an attorney’s affidavit of fault, direct the attorney to pay reasonable compensatory legal fees and costs to opposing counsel of parties.”)

Accordingly, motion for terminating sanctions is DENIED. Issue and evidentiary sanctions are not appropriate at this time because they are best reserved for the trial judge in this matter.