This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 12/07/2019 at 20:48:01 (UTC).

RONALD BASS VS LONG BEACH PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION COMPANY

Case Summary

On 04/16/2018 a Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle case was filed by RONALD BASS against LONG BEACH PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION COMPANY in the jurisdiction of Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****1972

  • Filing Date:

    04/16/2018

  • Case Status:

    Disposed - Dismissed

  • Case Type:

    Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Stanley Mosk Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Presiding Judges

DENNIS J. LANDIN

CHRISTOPHER K. LUI

 

Party Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner

BASS RONALD

Defendants and Respondents

LONG BEACH PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION COMPANY

DOES 1 TO 200

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner Attorney

MOLCHAN JEFFREY L. ESQ.

Defendant and Respondent Attorneys

KAISER AND SWINDELLS LAW FIRM OF

SWINDELLS PAMELA ANN

 

Court Documents

Order - Dismissal

12/6/2019: Order - Dismissal

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR TERMINATING SANCTIONS)

12/6/2019: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR TERMINATING SANCTIONS)

Declaration - DECLARATION DECLARATION OF PAMELA SWINDELLS IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS MOTION FOR TERMINATING SANCTIONS

11/7/2019: Declaration - DECLARATION DECLARATION OF PAMELA SWINDELLS IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS MOTION FOR TERMINATING SANCTIONS

Motion for Terminating Sanctions

11/7/2019: Motion for Terminating Sanctions

Motion to Compel - MOTION TO COMPEL DEPOSITION OF PLAINTIFF AND PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS AND REQUEST FOR MONETARY SANCTIONS; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES; DECLARATION OF SARA HAKAMI, VIRGINIA M

7/9/2019: Motion to Compel - MOTION TO COMPEL DEPOSITION OF PLAINTIFF AND PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS AND REQUEST FOR MONETARY SANCTIONS; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES; DECLARATION OF SARA HAKAMI, VIRGINIA M

Motion to Compel Discovery (not Further Discovery) - 1 moving party, 1 motion

7/9/2019: Motion to Compel Discovery (not Further Discovery) - 1 moving party, 1 motion

Notice - NOTICE OF RULING RE: GRANTING OF DISCOVERY MOTIONS AND IMPOSITION OF MONETARY SANCTIONS

8/6/2019: Notice - NOTICE OF RULING RE: GRANTING OF DISCOVERY MOTIONS AND IMPOSITION OF MONETARY SANCTIONS

Notice of Ruling

9/9/2019: Notice of Ruling

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (DEFENDANT LONG BEACH PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION COMPANY'S EX PARTE...)

9/9/2019: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (DEFENDANT LONG BEACH PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION COMPANY'S EX PARTE...)

MOTION TO BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL

8/2/2018: MOTION TO BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL

DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF ATTORNEY'S MOTION TO BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL-CIVIL

7/9/2018: DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF ATTORNEY'S MOTION TO BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL-CIVIL

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL CIVIL

7/9/2018: NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL CIVIL

CIVIL DEPOSIT -

6/7/2018: CIVIL DEPOSIT -

DEFENDANT LONG BEACH PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION COMPANY'S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT

6/7/2018: DEFENDANT LONG BEACH PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION COMPANY'S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT

DEFFNDANT LONG BEACH PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION COMPANY'S DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

6/7/2018: DEFFNDANT LONG BEACH PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION COMPANY'S DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

DEFENDANT LONG BEACH PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION COMPANY'S REQUEST FOR STATEMENT OF DAMAGES

6/7/2018: DEFENDANT LONG BEACH PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION COMPANY'S REQUEST FOR STATEMENT OF DAMAGES

PROOF OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS

5/11/2018: PROOF OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS

SUMMONS -

4/16/2018: SUMMONS -

12 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 12/06/2019
  • Docketat 1:30 PM in Department 4A, Christopher K. Lui, Presiding; Hearing on Motion for Terminating Sanctions - Held - Motion Granted

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/06/2019
  • DocketMinute Order ( (Defendant's Motion for Terminating Sanctions)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/06/2019
  • DocketOrder - Dismissal; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/07/2019
  • DocketMotion for Terminating Sanctions; Filed by Long Beach Public Transportation company (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/07/2019
  • DocketDeclaration (DECLARATION OF PAMELA SWINDELLS IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT?S MOTION FOR TERMINATING SANCTIONS); Filed by Long Beach Public Transportation company (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/01/2019
  • Docketat 1:30 PM in Department 4A, Christopher K. Lui, Presiding; Hearing on Motion for Terminating Sanctions - Not Held - Rescheduled by Party

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/16/2019
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 4A, Christopher K. Lui, Presiding; Jury Trial - Not Held - Advanced and Continued - by Court

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/30/2019
  • Docketat 10:00 AM in Department 4A, Christopher K. Lui, Presiding; Final Status Conference - Not Held - Advanced and Continued - by Court

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/09/2019
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 4A, Christopher K. Lui, Presiding; Hearing on Ex Parte Application (To continue the trial and related dates) - Held - Motion Granted

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/09/2019
  • DocketEx Parte Application (to continue the trial and related dates); Filed by Long Beach Public Transportation company (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
24 More Docket Entries
  • 06/07/2018
  • DocketDemand for Jury Trial; Filed by Long Beach Public Transportation company (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/07/2018
  • DocketCIVIL DEPOSIT

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/07/2018
  • DocketDEFENDANT LONG BEACH PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION COMPANY'S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/07/2018
  • DocketReceipt; Filed by Long Beach Public Transportation company (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/07/2018
  • DocketDEFFNDANT LONG BEACH PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION COMPANY'S DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/11/2018
  • DocketProof-Service/Summons

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/11/2018
  • DocketPROOF OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/16/2018
  • DocketSUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/16/2018
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by Ronald Bass (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/16/2018
  • DocketCOMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES: 1. STATUTORY LIABILITY NEGLIGENCE

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC701972    Hearing Date: December 06, 2019    Dept: 4A

Motion for Terminating Sanctions

Having considered the moving papers, the Court rules as follows.

BACKGROUND

On April 16, 2018, Plaintiff Ronald Bass (“Plaintiff”) filed a complaint against Defendant Long Beach Public Transportation Company (“Defendant”) alleging violations of various sections of the Civil Code, Government Code, and Vehicle Code for a bus suddenly stopping and hurling Plaintiff forward on May 18, 2017.

On November 7, 2019, Defendant filed a motion for terminating sanctions against Plaintiff pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 2023.030.

Trial is set for January 6, 2020.

PARTYS REQUESTS

Defendant asks the Court to impose terminating sanctions against Plaintiff for failing to abide by an August 6, 2019 Court order.

As an requests that the Court impose an evidence sanctions precluding Plaintiff from presenting any evidence at trial regarding negligence and damages.

Defendant also asks the Court to impose $1,840 in monetary sanctions against Plaintiff.

LEGAL STANDARD

California Code of Civil Procedure section 2023.030 provides that, “[t]o the extent authorized by the chapter governing any particular discovery method . . . , the court, after notice to any affected party, person, or attorney, and after opportunity for hearing, may impose . . . [monetary, issue, evidence, or terminating] sanctions against anyone engaging in conduct that is a misuse of the discovery process . . . .” California Code of Civil Procedure section 2023.010 provides that “[m]issues of the discovery process include, but are not limited to, the following: . . . (g) Disobeying a court order to provide discovery. . . .

“Discovery sanctions must be tailored in order to remedy the offending party’s discovery abuse, should not give the aggrieved party more than what it is entitled to, and should not be used to punish the offending party.”  (Karlsson v. Ford Motor Co. (2006) 140 Cal.App.4th 1202, 1217.)  “Although the court has discretion in choosing a sanction, this discretion must be exercised in a manner consistent with the basic purposes of such sanctions, e.g., to compel disclosure of discoverable information.”  (Rutledge v. Hewlett-Packard Co. (2015) 238 Cal.App.4th 1164, 1193 (citation omitted).)  “Furthermore, the sanction chosen should not provide a windfall to the other party, by putting the prevailing party in a better position than if he or she had obtained the discovery sought and it had been favorable.”  (Ibid. (citations omitted).)

A court may not issue a terminating sanction for failure to pay a monetary discovery sanction.  (Newland v. Superior Court (1995) 40 Cal.App.4th 608, 610, 615.)  Rather, a monetary sanction order is enforceable as a money judgment under the Enforcement of Judgments Law, California Code of Civil Procedure sections 680.010, et seq. Id. at p. 615.)

DISCUSSION

On August 6, 2019, the Court ordered Plaintiff to serve verified responses to Defendant’s written discovery within 30 days and appear at a deposition within 20 days.  (Hakami Decl., ¶ 13.Also on August 6, 2019, the Court ordered Plaintiff to pay Defendant $960 within 30 days.  (Ibid.On September 30, 2019, Defendant reminded Plaintiff of his obligations under the August 6, 2019 Court order.  (Hakami Decl., 19, Exh. J.) 

On October 1, 2019, Defendant served a notice of deposition on Plaintiff for a deposition date of October 16, 2019.  (Hakami Decl., 20, Exh. K.)  Also on October 1, 2019, Defendant spoke with Plaintiff to confirm his deposition and to demand that Plaintiff serve written discovery responses prior to the deposition.  (Hakimi Decl., 21.)  On October 15, 2019, Defendant attempted to speak with Plaintiff two times leaving two messages to confirm Plaintiff’s deposition and demand that Plaintiff serve written discovery responses prior to the deposition.  (Ibid.)  On October 16, 2019, Plaintiff left his deposition because he did not have a lawyer.  (Hakimi Decl., 22, Exh. L.)  Plaintiff has not served the outstanding responses nor paid sanctions, and has refused to appear for his deposition. Hakami Decl., ¶ 17.)

The Court initially notes that Plaintiff’s failure to pay Court-ordered sanctions within 30 days of the August 6, 2019 ruling cannot be grounds for granting this motion.  (See Newland, supra, 40 Cal.App.4th at pp. 610, 615.)

Nonetheless, the Court finds terminating sanctions are proper here.  Plaintiff failed to abide by the Court’s August 6, 2019 order compelling his responses to written discovery within 30 days and to appear at a deposition within 20 days.  Defendant consistently sought Plaintiff’s compliance with the August 6, 2019 Court order on September 30, 2019, October 1, 2019, October 15, 2019, and October 16, 2019.  

Plaintiff refused to be deposed providing the excuse that he did not have a lawyer present.  But Plaintiff was served with the order relieving his prior attorney from acting as his counsel in this case more than one year ago on August 30, 2018.  There is no evidence in the Court’s record that Plaintiff has retained substitute counsel or even that he has made efforts to do soBased on this record, the Court concludes that Plaintiff’s failure to retain counsel and have representation at his October 16, 2019 deposition is none other than Plaintiff’s fault.

The Court finds the requested evidence sanctions and monetary sanctions are inappropriate here because terminating sanctions provides an adequate remedy for Plaintiff’s abuse of the discovery process.

The motion is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.

The complaint is dismissed without prejudice.

All future dates are vacated.

Defendant is ordered to give notice of this ruling.