On 05/21/2019 KIMBERLY FIELD filed a Labor - Wrongful Termination lawsuit against LOWELL JOINT SCHOOL DISTRICT. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is YOLANDA OROZCO. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.
Pending - Other Pending
Stanley Mosk Courthouse
Los Angeles, California
LOWELL JOINT SCHOOL DISTRICT
DOES 1 THOUGH 10
DARROLL EILEEN PALMER
10/17/2019: Case Management Order
10/17/2019: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE)
10/3/2019: Case Management Statement
10/2/2019: Case Management Statement
10/4/2019: Notice of Posting of Jury Fees
8/26/2019: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (COURT ORDER)
8/26/2019: Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR (COURT ORDER) OF 08/26/2019
5/24/2019: Notice of Case Management Conference
5/21/2019: Summons - SUMMONS ON COMPLAINT
5/21/2019: Civil Case Cover Sheet
5/21/2019: Notice of Case Assignment - Unlimited Civil Case
Hearing10/19/2020 at 09:30 AM in Department 31 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Jury TrialRead MoreRead Less
Hearing10/09/2020 at 08:30 AM in Department 31 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Final Status ConferenceRead MoreRead Less
Hearing08/06/2020 at 08:30 AM in Department 31 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Post-Mediation Status ConferenceRead MoreRead Less
Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 31, Yolanda Orozco, Presiding; Case Management Conference - HeldRead MoreRead Less
DocketMinute Order ( (Case Management Conference)); Filed by ClerkRead MoreRead Less
DocketCase Management Order; Filed by ClerkRead MoreRead Less
DocketNotice of Posting of Jury Fees; Filed by LOWELL JOINT SCHOOL DISTRICT (Defendant)Read MoreRead Less
DocketCase Management Statement; Filed by LOWELL JOINT SCHOOL DISTRICT (Defendant)Read MoreRead Less
DocketCase Management Statement; Filed by Jonathan Ebrahimian (Attorney); KIMBERLY FIELD (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 31, Yolanda Orozco, Presiding; Case Management Conference - Not Held - Continued - Court's MotionRead MoreRead Less
Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 31, Yolanda Orozco, Presiding; Court OrderRead MoreRead Less
DocketMinute Order ( (Court Order)); Filed by ClerkRead MoreRead Less
DocketCertificate of Mailing for ((Court Order) of 08/26/2019); Filed by ClerkRead MoreRead Less
DocketAnswer; Filed by LOWELL JOINT SCHOOL DISTRICT (Defendant)Read MoreRead Less
DocketNotice of Case Management Conference; Filed by ClerkRead MoreRead Less
DocketComplaint; Filed by KIMBERLY FIELD (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
DocketSummons (on Complaint); Filed by KIMBERLY FIELD (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
DocketNotice of Case Assignment - Unlimited Civil Case; Filed by ClerkRead MoreRead Less
DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by KIMBERLY FIELD (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
Case Number: 19STCV17739 Hearing Date: October 06, 2020 Dept: 31
DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR DISCOVERY SANCTIONS IS GRANTED.
On May 21, 2019, Plaintiff Kimberly Field filed the instant action against Defendant Lowell Joint School District and Does 1 through 10. The Complaint asserts causes of action for:
Employment Discrimination in Violation of FEHA (Gov. Code § 12940(a));
Interference with Pregnancy Disability Leave Law in Violation of FEHA (Gov. Code § 12945(a));
Failure to Provide Reasonable Accommodation in Violation of FEHA (Gov. Code § 12940(m), 12945(a));
Failure to Engage in a Timely & Good-Faith Interactive Process in Violation of FEHA (Gov. Code § 12940(n), 12945(a));
Retaliation in Violation of FEHA (Gov. Code § 12940(h), 12940(m), 12945(a)); and
Failure to Prevent/Remedy Discrimination and/or Retaliation in Violation of FEHA (Gov. Code § 12940(k)).
On June 10, 2020, Defendant filed the instant motion to compel further responses to its Form Interrogatories-Employment Law, Set One, Nos. 202.1, 204.1, 204.2, 204.5, 207.2, 213.1, and 213.2. The motion also seeks sanctions in the amount of $1,855.00.
On August 19, 2020, the Court convened an Informal Discovery Conference (“IDC”) with the parties. On September 29, 2020, Defendant indicated that Plaintiff provided Third Supplemental Responses to the discovery at issue. However, Defendant still moves for an order for sanctions pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure sections 2030.290(c), 2023.010, and 2023.030(a).
Code of Civil Procedure section 2023.030 states, in relevant part:
To the extent authorized by the chapter governing any particular discovery method or any other provision of this title, the court, after notice to any affected party, person, or attorney, and after opportunity for hearing, may impose the following sanctions against anyone engaging in conduct that is a misuse of the discovery process:
(a) The court may impose a monetary sanction ordering that one engaging in the misuse of the discovery process, or any attorney advising that conduct, or both pay the reasonable expenses, including attorney's fees, incurred by anyone as a result of that conduct. The court may also impose this sanction on one unsuccessfully asserting that another has engaged in the misuse of the discovery process, or on any attorney who advised that assertion, or on both. If a monetary sanction is authorized by any provision of this title, the court shall impose that sanction unless it finds that the one subject to the sanction acted with substantial justification or that other circumstances make the imposition of the sanction unjust.
Misuses of the discovery process include, but are not limited to, the following:
(a) Persisting, over objection and without substantial justification, in an attempt to obtain information or materials that are outside the scope of permissible discovery.
(b) Using a discovery method in a manner that does not comply with its specified procedures.
(c) Employing a discovery method in a manner or to an extent that causes unwarranted annoyance, embarrassment, or oppression, or undue burden and expense.
(d) Failing to respond or to submit to an authorized method of discovery.
(e) Making, without substantial justification, an unmeritorious objection to discovery.
(f) Making an evasive response to discovery.
(g) Disobeying a court order to provide discovery.
(h) Making or opposing, unsuccessfully and without substantial justification, a motion to compel or to limit discovery.
(i) Failing to confer in person, by telephone, or by letter with an opposing party or attorney in a reasonable and good faith attempt to resolve informally any dispute concerning discovery, if the section governing a particular discovery motion requires the filing of a declaration stating facts showing that an attempt at informal resolution has been made.
Defendant moves for sanctions in the amount of $1,855.00 against Plaintiff and her counsel of record, Johnathan Ebrahimian, in connection with the instant motion to compel further responses. Defendant asserts that despite Plaintiff providing supplemental responses, it has taken a year, multiple meet and confer letters, the instant motion to compel, and an IDC to get Plaintiff’s latest responses. Defendant contends that it served the subject interrogatories on September 6, 2019. (Suppl. Williams Decl. ¶ 2, Exh. H; Williams Decl., Exh. A.)
Defendant seeks $1,855.00 in sanctions, consisting of 7.6 hours spent preparing the moving papers, more than 2 hours spent preparing a reply, and an anticipated 1 hour preparing and arguing the matter in court billed at a rate of $175 per hour.
The Court finds that Defendant is entitled to sanctions pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 2023.030(a) for Plaintiff’s misuse of the discovery process. Moreover, the Court finds that the amount of Defendant’s request is reasonable.
Based on the foregoing, Defendant’s motion for sanctions is GRANTED.
Defendant’s motion for sanctions is GRANTED. Plaintiff and her counsel of record, Johnathan Ebrahimian, are ordered to pay monetary sanctions to Defendant in the amount of $1,855.00 within 30 days.
The parties are strongly encouraged to attend all scheduled hearings virtually or by audio. Effective July 20, 2020, all matters will be scheduled virtually and/or with audio through the Court’s LACourtConnect technology. The parties are strongly encouraged to use LACourtConnect for all their matters. All social distancing protocols will be observed at the Courthouse and in the courtrooms.
Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases