WILLIAM WOODS vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA - According to the Los Angeles County online case summary for the matter, as well as documents in the court file, plaintiff's attorney in this matter is listed as Ronald Goldszer.

From the tentative ruling this is what happened:

Attorney Ronald Goldszer represents the plaintiff in this case.

The State of California served discovery on Mr. Goldszer's client. This consisted of written questions to be answered, requests to admit certain facts as true, and requests to produce documents.

Normally there is about thirty days to respond.

Here defendant granted Mr. Goldszer's client an extension of time.

But there was no response.

The state's attorney tried to meet and confer about the issue with Ronald Goldszer, Esq.

Still no response.

So defendant naturally filed a motion to compel.

The situation was apparently so bad the Goldszer law firm did not bother to oppose the motion, even though sanctions against counsel were being requested.

The judge did not seem to like what had happened.

First, Goldszer's client was ordered to answer all the questions and provide documents, without making any objections, within ten days.

Second, all the requests for admissions were deemed admitted.

Note: This is probably devastated to attorney Goldszer's client. Assuming the discovery was decent, having facts admitted can be very damaging to a case. Often, this effectively ends a lawsuit.

Third, the judge sanctioned plaintiff's attorney of record, which according to the online case summary is Ronald Goldszer, $600. Or maybe his law firm Silverman & Goldszer is on the hook to pay the sanctions.

The amount could have been higher than $600 but the defendant apparently made a technical mistake in its notice of motion.

Reviewing what we could of the publicly online records for the case, it appears this is not the first sanction in the case.

A month earlier the City of Burbank was awarded $1000 in sanctions against plaintiff.

This case is getting expensive for plaintiff and his attorney.

Worse, as previously noted, the order deeming facts admitted could potentially be devastating to any value the case had.



KATHY MACKEY VS CITY OF CULVER CITY - The judge's order states Ronald Goldszer is the attorney for plaintiff.

From the tentative ruling this is what happened:

Attorney Ronald Goldszer of Silverman and Goldszer represents the plaintiff in this case.

The defendant served written questions for Mr. Goldszer's client to answer, and a request for documents to be produced.

Defense counsel then gave an extension of time to respond. Then a second extension. Then a third extension. Then a fourth extension.

And for their graciousness Ronald Goldszer stiffed them - providing no responses from his client at all.

Obviously, motions to compel were then filed.

Despite the motion that still did not motivate Mr. Goldszer and his client to respond.

But perhaps the court's order will ....

Goldszer's client was ordered to answer all questions and to produce all documents, without objection, within twenty days.

Attorney Ronald Goldszer was personally sanctioned $430 to be paid within thirty days.

If you are keeping score that is now more than $1000 in sanctions, we have seen, against the attorney. It is probably the tip of the iceberg.



ELIZABETH URSUA VS CAVIAR LA INC Incredibly, this is Mr. Goldszer's third sanctions order in about three weeks. We only see a few court orders but at this point are assuming this is just the tip of the iceberg and Ronald Goldszer is a sanctions machine.

From the tentative ruling this is what happened:

Attorney Ronald Goldszer of Silverman and Goldszer represents the plaintiffs in this automobile accident case.

Defendant served a request to produce documents and written questions for Goldszer's client to answer.

No responses were made.

Defense counsel sent a letter about the responses - but still received nothing.

So defendant filed a motion to compel. Par for the course for attorney Goldszer, still nothing in response.

The judge then stepped in an ordered Ron Goldszer, Esq.'s client to answer all discovery within twenty days.

The judge then sanctioned Mr. Goldszer's firm Silverman and Goldszer $1290, also payable within twenty days.

Sanctions were also ordered against the client.

Would you hire Ronald Goldszer to be your attorney?

From the first case - what we have read in the tentative ruling from the judge, and learning this is not the first sanction order in the case, and further noting the judge decided to sanction Mr. Goldszer personally, hiring Goldszer could be a tough sell.

If this were just a client problem then only the client would have been sanctioned.

But the judge said attempts were made to meet and confer with counsel about issues and they still resulting in no discovery responses.

From the second case this appears to be a pattern from Mr. Goldszer. Frankly, it appears to us he is incompetent and causing his clients to be sanctioned. The judges are recognizing this is not simply a client problem and are personally sanctioning the attorney for misconduct.

From the third sanctions order seen in less than a month, this is a bad pattern. We would not recommend that anyone hire attorney Ronald Goldszer.

Can you imagine hiring an attorney to represent you in court when the judge has said he is deserving of repeated sanctions?

If you are keeping score, we have now found $2320 in sanctions against Goldszer and his law firm. The actual amount is probably much, much higher.

Ronald Goldszer was admitted to the California Bar in 1985. Bar Number 119824.

Silverman & Goldszer
8530 Wilshire Boulevard PH
Beverly Hills, California 90211

Law School: Pepperdine