Blanchard v Goldstein and also here, Los Angeles County Superior Court Case Number BC641102.


From the court's tentative rulings and online county case records it is Lawzilla's understanding the following occurred:

Attorney Andrew Aukland represented the plaintiff in an auto accident case.




Defendants served written questions for plaintiff to answer as part of discovery.

Aukland's office did not serve responses for his client by the due date.

Defendant's attorney granted Aukland an extension of time for his client. Then another extension of time.

Finally, a motion to compel was filed.




The court said by failing to respond to the discovery Andrew Aukland, Esq., had waived any objections to the discovery, including objections based on privilege and protecting attorney work product.




The judge said attorney Andrew Aukland did not file any opposition to the motion or request for sanctions.

Despite a motion being filed with the court, there were still no discovery responses.




The judge then initially imposed sanctions against both attorney Andrew Aukland and his client for $205.40.




There was then a court hearing for the motion.

Attorney Andrew Aukland did not appear.

The judge then adopted the tentative ruling as the final order of the court.




The second order by the judge.

Additional discovery was sent to Aukland's client. There was no response.

Attorney Aukland was given multiple extensions of time for his client. Still no response.

A motion to compel was filed - still no response, and no opposition to the motion was made.

The judge said sanctions of $611.25 were going to be imposed.




Andrew Aukland did not bother to appear for the court hearing

The judge then adopted the tentative ruling as the final court order.

Interesting court orders repeatedly sanctioning attorney Andrew Aukland.

The judge refers to laws for imposing sanctions.

The laws impose sanctions against anyone who unsuccessfully opposes a motion to compel.

Aukland did not file any oppositions. Moreover, the failure to respond to discovery was his client's failure and only his client was directed to provide answers to the questions.

There are other laws the judge did not mention about meeting and conferring and good faith, but the judge noted defendant's motions did not have a meet and confer requirement.

As best Lawzilla can interpret the court's orders the attorney sanctions must relate to attorney Aukland obtaining multiple extensions of time for his client to answer discovery and then failing to obtain those responses.

Since Andrew Aukland did not oppose either motion seeking sanctions against him, or appear at the court hearings, we assume he agreed attorney sanctions were warranted.

If you are looking to retain an attorney you will have to ask yourself if this is the attorney you want to aggressively pursue your case?

Andrew Aukland was admitted to the California Bar in 2010. Bar Number 269394.

4929 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 415
Los Angeles, California 90010

Law School: Loyola Law School

Sanctions are Recoverable as a Judgment - Analysis of the little known fact that sanctions awarded in a lawsuit can be enforced as their own separate judgment. Surprise someone by putting a lien on their bank account, home, wages, etc.