FREDDY LOPEZ VS JOE RAU VELASCO

Summary: Attorney Kelly Casado represented the plaintiff. Defendant served discovery on Casado's client but no responses were made. A motion to compel was filed.

The judge issued a tentative ruling ordering $470 in sanctions for misconduct. However, the motion was withdrawn before the judge could make a final ruling.



From the Judge:

Attorney Kelly Lawrence Casado represents the plaintiff in this motor vehicle case.

The defendant served a request for the production of documents and a request that written questions be answered.

Responses were due in about thirty days. If any of the discovery was objectionable the attorney also has about thirty days to make the objection, or else the objection is waived.

Responses were not timely made and there were no objections.

Defendant's attorney sent a letter requesting responses, but there were no discovery responses from attorney Kelly Casado's office.

Defendants then filed motions to compel.

At some point after the motions were filed the Los Angeles judge reviewed the situation and issued a tentative ruling explaining how the court planned on ruling.

The judge said sanctions were appropriate against attorney Kelly Casado and client in the amount of $470.

Obviously, the court also said it would be granting the motions to compel since discovery responses had not been provided.



From the Court File:

Lawzilla then reviewed what documents and information are available online from the court file, and found an interesting twist.

Casado never filed an opposition to the motion to compel. However, the defendant's attorney told the court the motions to compel were being taken off calendar.

No final order was made by the court.



Lawzilla Commentary:

Our impression of the hearing being cancelled is the attorneys resolved the dispute.

Speculation on our part is this means attorney Kelly Lawrence Casado finally obtained client responses and documents to the discovery. Potentially, some money, perhaps the intended sanctions, were paid to get rid of the motions and avoid a final order.

Of course, maybe defendant's attorney was satsified with getting discovery responses and decided sanctions were not worth having and cancelled the hearing. It appears to us from the email address for defendant's attorney that they are employed by Travelers insurance. More speculation on our part, but insurance company attorneys may be more willing to forego sanctions.

Would you hire Kelly Lawrence Casado to be your attorney?

Although there was no final court order, much can be learned from the tentative ruling. There is good and bad.

The bad, of course, is an attorney waiving objections, failing to respond to discovery, not addressing a letter from the other attorney about the situation, and letting a motion to compel be filed.

It is not a good situation to receive a tentative ruling (or any type of ruling from a judge) saying the attorney deserves to be sanctioned - in addition to their client.

The good is that the motions were taken off calendar. It is reasonable to assume attorney Casado secured discovery responses from the client and possibly paid the sanctions to avoid an order against the attorney and client.

We are not sure if this is good lawyering by the Casado Law Firm or not. On the one hand it avoids a final order and sanctions against their client. On the other hand, if we had not seen and republished the tentative ruling no one would ever know about the attorney misconduct and intended sanctions.

Overall, we would say it is a good thing for attorneys to resolve a dispute and avoid a final court order.

Kelly Casado was admitted to the California Bar in 2009. Bar Number 268191.

Casado Law Firm, A Professional Law Corporation
1541 Wilshire Boulevard Suite 508
Los Angeles, California 90017

Law School: Whittier College