JOSE GOMEZ-ROMERO VS FREDDY TERRAZAS - According to the judge's order, plaintiff is represented by Michael Sanchez. Mr. Sanchez is also listed as the plaintiff's attorney on the Los Angeles county case summary for this matter.

From the tentative ruling this is what happened:

Attorney Michael A. Sanchez represents the plaintiff in this case.

The defendant served discovery on Mr. Sanchez' clients to answer. This consisted of written questions to answer and a request for documents to be provided.

The general rule is responses were due in about thirty days.

The discovery was served in May 2017 and should have been answered in June 2017.

However, nothing apparently came from Sanchez' office.

The defense attorney sent attorney Sanchez a letter about the situation and gave a ten-day extension of time to answer.

Still nothing from Sanchez' law firm.

In December the defense attorney sent another letter granting another extension of time.

Still nothing.

In February the judge indicates Michael Sanchez asked for an extension to February 2018, which defense counsel granted.

Still nothing.

At that point defendants filed motions to compel.

In response to the motions - still nothing from Michael Sanchez.

The judge then reviewed the situation and who to impose sanctions on.

The judge's order indicates there was misuse of discovery and sanctions were appropriate.

The court also decided sanctions were appropriate against attorney Michael Sanchez and not just his clients.

Sanctions of $345 were issued.

Noteworthy is attorney Sanchez' State Bar records indicate he is with a law firm Mendez and Sanchez.

However, the judge singled Michael Sanchez, Esq., for personal sanctions.

Instead of sanctioning the law firm Mendez and Sanchez, the court ordered sanctions against Michael Anthony Sanchez, by name.

Sanchez was to be given thirty days to pay. His clients were given twenty days to answer all discovery without objection.

Would you hire Michael A. Sanchez to be your attorney?

The judge's order is obviously very concerning.

Worse is that the judge indicated, by sanctioning the attorney, that the problem was not the client refusing to answer discovery, but there was also an attorney problem. Possibly from making false representations about providing responses after obtaining multiple extensions of time.

From the case docket it appears Mr. Sanchez did not bother opposing the request for sanctions against him and his clients.

However, he was able to file a request to continue the trial. Perhaps he is not prepared?

Michael Sanchez aka Michael Anthony Sanchez was admitted to the California Bar in 2015. Bar Number 303005.

Mendez & Sanchez, A Professional Corporation
5440 East Beverly Boulevard
Los Angeles, California 90022

Law School: Whittier