Riley v Khalid San Mateo County Superior Court Case Number 18-CIV-03789.


From the San Mateo County online records for this case it is Lawzilla's understanding the following occurred:

Attorney Cary Kletter filed a lawsuit representing the plaintiff and making a variety of claims.




During the litigation the Kletter law firm made a request for defendant to produce documents.

Cary Kletter, Esq., filed a motion to compel production of documents from defendant and sought sanctions.




In the motion Kletter apparently sought sanctions of $2521 and said under penalty of the law his billing rate is $500 per hour.

Kletter also claimed $250 per hour for a law clerk and $195 per hour for a paralegal.




The motion also said "Plaintiffs have not received any response to the Document Demand" and were required to file the motion.




After reviewing the situation the judge denied the motion and ruled:

1. Attorney Cary Kletter's motion was not properly noticed. He did not file a Notice of Motion.

2. The body of the motion did not seek an order compelling the production of documents, but instead sought to compel 'verified responses' to Plaintiff's document requests.

3. Sanctions were sought but the notice did not identify, as is required, the person/party against whom the sanctions are sought.

4. Contrary to Plaintiff's contention no response was made, defendant timely served written objections to each of the document requests at issue. Plaintiff's moving papers omitted this key fact.

5. Kletter failed to include a Separate Statement required by the Rules of Court.

We do not often see a court order reflecting such apparent attorney incompetence.

In our opinion, this is not exactly what we would want to pay an attorney $500 per hour for.

$500 per hour!!

A lot of people do not make that much in a week.

We wonder if his client will have to pay the law firm's billing for the motion given the judge's order.

It caught our attention when the judge said a key fact was omitted from Kletter's motion - that defendant had actually served objections to the document requests.

Cary Kletter had argued no response was made.

We do not know why or how this happened.

But we believe when a judge says a "key" fact was omitted by an attorney it can be a serious matter.

Then we saw the opposing argument from defense counsel. We do not know if defense counsel is correct, but the claims are stunning.

The other attorney claimed the motion by attorney Cary Kletter:

- Concealed facts from the court

- Made false statements

- Edited something in a deliberate and dishonest attempt to mislead the court

- Was wholly dishonest




Wow!

The judge, however, declined to issue any sanctions. Not against Kletter and not against the other attorney.


What Ethical Duties Does an Attorney Have?

According to the State Bar, the California Rules of Professional Conduct are rules designed to regulate the conduct of licensed California lawyers.

Rule 3.3 imposes two requirements on attorneys.

First, an attorney shall not knowingly make any false statement of fact to a court.

Second, an attorney shall correct any false statement of material fact made to a court.


What Other Laws May Apply?

California Business and Professions Code section 6068(d) prohibits an attorney from misleading a judge by making a false statement of fact.

A violation can result in discipline by the State Bar, including a potential suspension from the practice of law or disbarment.


Although the judge did not sanction attorney Kletter (or the other attorney), the judge did rule a "key fact" was omitted from Kletter's papers.

Cary Kletter was admitted to the California Bar in 2000. Bar Number 210230.

Kletter Law
1900 South Norfolk Street Suite 350
San Mateo, California 94403

Law School: Hofstra School of Law