Case Number: BC588824??? Hearing Date: February 10, 2017??? Dept: 98
T.P., a minor, by and through his Guardian ad Litem, DORIS MASON, and his Natural Guardian, TYRA MASON,
Plaintiff,
vs.
LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, et al.,
Defendants.
CASE NO: BC588824
[TENTATIVE] ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT?S MOTION FOR TERMINATING SANCTIONSDept. 98
1:30 p.m.
January 10, 2017
On July 29, 2015, Plaintiff T.P., a minor, by and through his Guardian ad Litem, Doris Mason, and his Natural Guardian, Tyra Mason (?Plaintiff?) filed this action against Defendants Los Angeles Unified School District (?LAUSD?) and Daniel Esteez. On May 19, 2016, LAUSD served Plaintiff with Requests for Admission, Set One; Form Interrogatories, Set One; Special Interrogatories, Set One; and Inspection Demand, Set One. Declaration of Jamie E. Wright, ? 4. On September 19, 2016, this Court granted LAUSD?s unopposed Motions to compel Plaintiff?s responses to these discovery requests and ordered Plaintiff to pay monetary sanctions. Id., ? 15. Plaintiff has failed to provide the Court-ordered responses or monetary sanctions. Id., ? 16. LAUSD therefore now moves for terminating sanctions against Plaintiff.
The Court may impose a terminating sanction against anyone engaging in conduct that is a misuse of the discovery process. Cal. Code of Civ. Proc., ? 2023.030(d). Misuse of the discovery process includes failure to respond to an authorized method of discovery or disobeying a court order to provide discovery. Id., ?? 2023.010(d), (g). A terminating sanction may be imposed by an order dismissing part or all of the action. Id., ?? 2023.030(d)(3). ??Only two facts are absolutely prerequisite to imposition of the sanction: (1) there must be a failure to comply ? and (2) the failure must be willful.?? Liberty Mut. Fire Ins. Co. v. LcL Adm?rs, Inc. (2008) 163 Cal.App.4th 1093, 1102. Terminating sanctions should not be ordered lightly, but ?where a violation is willful, preceded by a history of abuse, and the evidence shows that less severe sanctions would not produce compliance with the discovery rules, the trial court is justified in imposing the ultimate sanction.? Los Defensores, Inc. v. Gomez (2014) 223 Cal.App.4th 377, 390.
The Court finds that Plaintiff has engaged in misuse of the discovery process both by failing to respond to LAUSD?s discovery requests and by disobeying a court order to provide discovery. The Court concludes that anything less severe than a terminating sanction would not result in compliance. Further, there is no evidence suggesting that Plaintiff?s failure to comply with the Order was not willful. Therefore, LAUSD?s unopposed Motion for terminating sanctions is GRANTED. Plaintiff?s Complaint as to LAUSD hereby is dismissed.
Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at SMCDEPT98@lacourt.org as directed by the instructions provided on the court website. If the department does not receive an email indicating the parties are submitting on the tentative and there are no appearances at the hearing, the motion will be placed off calendar.
Dated this 10th day of January, 2017
Hon. Holly J. Fujie
Judge of the Superior Court