CRIS DURGHINESCU VS FRED LAVI - The Law Offices of Vincet Real, we believe is the attorney for the defendants, based on what is stated in the Los Angeles county online case summary.

From the tentative ruling we believe this is what happened:

Attorney Vincent Real represents the defendants in a commercial security deposit dispute.

The amount of the deposit is $5000.

Note: This is an amount that possibly could have been pursued in small claims court.

Plaintiff served discovery consisting of written questions to be answered, a request for documents, and request for admissions.

No response was received from attorney Real's office for his client. This meant if any of the discovery was objectionable, such as discovery asking for information proteced by the attorney-client privilege, then Vincent Real waived the objection.

After not receiving any response plaintiff's counsel contacted defense cousel.

Still no response from attorney Vincent Real.

Not surprisingly, plaintiffs then filed a motion to compel.

Still, apparently no response to the discovery from Mr. Real's clients is reflected in what the judge said.

It appears no response to the motions was made by attorney Real to explain the situation or to provide any excuse for what was transpiring.

The judge then laid down the hammer.

$3080 in sanctions were then imposed against Vincent Real, Esq.'s clients.

They were also ordered to respond to all discovery, without objection, within twenty days.

Ouch. $3080 in sanctions for a case apparently involving a $5000 deposit.

If we understand the case right, that this was a $5000 dispute, given the legal fees to respond to the complaint and for even a bare-bones defense, the defendants may have been better off simply paying the deposit instead of defending the matter and hiring an attorney.

Would you hire Vincent Real to be your attorney?

The tentative order only says sanctions against defendants and not against their attorney. We do not know why there was no response to discovery. Maybe it was directed by the client. Maybe Vincent Real should have substituted out as counsel if a client was unreasonable, or if the attorney was unable to exercise client control, of if the attorney was unable to get responses to discovery.

Emil Vincent Real Jr was admitted to the California Bar in 1977. Bar Number 74938.

3625 Del Amo Boulevard #340
Torrance, California 90503

Law School: Loyola Law School