Lawzilla Additional Information:
Per the Los Angeles court records defendant is attorney Barry Fischer who is being sanctioned by the court.

Case Number: BC426960 Hearing Date: April 12, 2018 Dept: 34

SUBJECT: Motion for evidentiary and monetary sanctions

Moving Party: Plaintiff/Judgment Creditor Weinstein Weiss & Ordubegian, LLP

Resp. Party: None

The motion for evidentiary sanctions is GRANTED and the Court imposes monetary sanctions on defendant in the amount of $1,260.00.

BACKGROUND:

Plaintiff commenced this action on 11/25/09 against defendant Barry Fischer for breach of contract and injunctive relief.

On 9/30/11 the action was stayed pursuant to a bankruptcy stay. The stay was lifted on 9/10/14.

The action proceeded to a court trial on 12/15/14. Pursuant to the terms of a settlement, the Law Offices of Barry Fischer was added as a defendant. The Court entered judgment in favor of plaintiff and against defendants in the amount of $125,000.00, but stayed entry of judgment if defendants paid $34,000.00 on or before 5/14/15 and an additional $34,000.00 by 12/14/15. The Court dismissed the action pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6.

On 11/17/15, the Court granted plaintiff’s motion to enforce settlement and enter judgment. Judgment was entered on 11/17/15 in favor of plaintiff and against defendant in the total amount of $125,000.00.

ANALYSIS:

Plaintiff moves for an order imposing evidentiary sanctions on defendant for his failure to comply with this Court’s Order compelling him to provide verified answers to plaintiff’s First Set of Post-Judgment Special Interrogatories within 20 days and to pay sanctions in the amount of $1,660. (See Notice of Motion, p. 1:25-2:2.)

Code of Civil Procedure section 2023.030 gives the court the discretion to impose sanctions against anyone engaging in a misuse of the discovery process. A court may impose “an evidence sanction by an order prohibiting any party engaging in the misuse of the discovery process from introducing designated matters in evidence.” (Code Civ. Proc. § 2023.030, subd. (c).)

“A trial court has broad discretion to impose discovery sanctions, but two facts are generally prerequisite to the imposition of nonmonetary sanctions….: (1) absent unusual circumstances, there must be a failure to comply with a court order, and (2) the failure must be willful.” (Biles v. Exxon Mobil Corp. (2004) 124 Cal.App.4th 1315, 1327. But see Reedy v. Bussell (2007) 148 Cal.App.4th 1272, 1291 [“willfulness is no longer a requirement for the imposition of discovery sanctions.”].)

Plaintiff seeks an order prohibiting defendant “from introducing any evidence which pertains to those matters about which [plaintiff] sought information by way of his Interrogatories.” (Motion, p. 1:13-16.) In particular, plaintiff seeks to prevent defendant from introducing evidence concerning the information that was sought in Special Interrogatories Numbers 4-12 and 21. (Id. at p. 2:1-27.) Additionally, plaintiff requests that the Court impose sanctions on defendant in the amount of $2,660.00 as reimbursement for the costs incurred in bringing this motion. (Id. at p. 1:16-18.)

After securing a judgment against defendant in the amount of $125,000.00, plaintiff served its First Set of Post-Judgement Special Interrogatories “requesting information pertaining to the judgment debtor’s earnings, assets, encumbrances thereon, and other information which might enable Weinstein to enforce and/or collect on his judgment.” (Id. at p. 1:3-7.) Defendant never responded and, on 10/02/17, this Court granted plaintiff’s motion to compel defendant’s responses. (See Minute Order of 10/02/17.) Plaintiff declares that defendant has continued to disobey the Court’s order and has failed to provide verified answers to the Interrogatories or pay the sanctions as of 03/06/18. (Tovar Decl., ¶ 6.)

Defendant has not submitted an opposition to the instant motion. As of the date of this hearing, defendant will have had over six months in which to comply with this Court’s Order of 10/02/17. The Court concludes that defendant’s failure to comply was willful and that the requested evidentiary sanctions are appropriate.

Plaintiff is also entitled to monetary sanctions as compensation for the expenses incurred in bringing this motion. (See Code Civ. Proc. § 2030/030, subd. (a).) However, the amount requested is excessive. Plaintiff declares that the $2,660 requested represents two hours to draft the motion, 1.5 hours to review the opposition and draft a reply, and three hours to attend the hearing. (Tovar Decl., ¶ 7.) Plaintiff’s Counsel bills $400 per hour. (Ibid.) Plaintiff may reasonably recover for two hours of counsel’s time to draft the motion and one hour to attend the hearing. Because no opposition was filed, counsel has not spent any time drafting a reply. Plaintiff may also recover the $60 filing fee.

Accordingly, the Motion is GRANTED. The Court imposes evidentiary sanctions as requested and imposes monetary sanctions on defendant in the amount $1,260.00.