Aguirre v Tamazyan, Los Angeles County Superior Court Case Number BC703775.


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

Attorney Roland Tijerina represented the plaintiffs in an auto accident case.




The defendants served Tijerina's clients with various discovery requests to answer.

Roland Tijerina then said his litigation file was stolen from his car.

Defendants then re-served the discovery but no responses were made.

Defendants gave Tijerina's clients multiple extensions of time to respond, and still nothing was forthcoming.

About 8 months after the discovery was originally served defendants filed motions to compel and requested sanctions.




The judge said because attorney Roland Tijerina waived any objections to the discovery, including any objections based on privilege or protecting his attorney work product.




The court said Roland Tijerina "filed a declaration in opposition to the motions stating that responses will be forthcoming prior to the hearing. However, nothing has been filed to indicate that responses have been served as of this date."




The judge then initially ordered $720 in sanctions against attorney Roland Tijerina and his clients.




When it came time for the court hearing Roland Tijerina, Esq., decided not to personally appear before the judge.

Instead, he sent an email saying he accepted the court's tentative ruling.

The judge then adopted the court's tentative ruling as a final ruling, sanctioning Roland Tijerina $720.

What a hot mess.

First Mr. Tijerina claims his file is stolen from his car.

Then there are no discovery responses despite 8 months going by and multiple extensions of time from defendants.

Then still no responses after three motions to compel are filed.

Then the attorney represents to the court in a declaration under penalty of perjury that responses will be provided before the hearing.

The judge says there is nothing to indicate Roland Tijerina kept the promise in his representation.

Rather than facing the judge, the attorney sends an email.

Sanctions of $720 are awarded.

In Lawzilla's opinion, Tijerina is lucky only $720 in sanctions were awarded. Making a false representation to a judge can cause an attorney to be subject to bar discipline.

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.

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.

Roland Tijerina was admitted to the California Bar in 1987. Bar Number 128019.

Law Offices of Roland R Tijerina
2000 East 4th Street, Suite 308
Santa Ana, California 92705

Law School: Western State

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.