Discovery, Sanctions: $10,000 Discovery Sanctions Against Plaintiff And His Counsel Affirmed On Appeal

The Justification Was For A Failure To Meet And Confer Prior To Filing Motions To Compel.

            This next case, Nguyen v. City of Los Angeles, Case No. B321033 (2d Dist., Div. 5 July 31, 2023) (unpublished), is a lesson for all litigators to meaningfully engage in meet and confer requirements before filing a discovery motion to compel.  A $10,000 discovery sanctions award was affirmed against plaintiff and his counsel.

            The trial and appellate court did not like the sequence of events here.  The defense was led to believe that Plaintiff would meet and confer in good faith for a motion to compel extension within hours of the motion deadline (which was granted), only to be met with a demand for extensive supplemental responses within three days over the Year End holidays and then four motions to compel which were denied.  Informal meet and confer requests under CCP § 2023.020 are not a one-way street, with a trial court having ample discretion to deny motions to compel where the meet and confer extension requests are perfunctory and unreasonable in nature.