<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
   <channel>
      <title>Resolving Discovery Disputes - Right of Privacy</title>
      <link>http://www.resolvingdiscoverydisputes.com/privileges/right-of-privacy/</link>
      <description>California Discovery Referee &amp; Mediator</description>
      <language>en</language>
      <copyright>Copyright 2010</copyright>
      <lastBuildDate>Thu, 18 Nov 2010 12:47:10 -0800</lastBuildDate>
      <pubDate>Thu, 18 Nov 2010 12:47:10 -0800</pubDate>
      <generator>http://www.sixapart.com/movabletype/?v=4.32-en</generator>
      <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs> 

      
      <item>
         <title>GAME ON-The Opposition</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><img class="mt-image-left" style="MARGIN: 0px 20px 20px 0px; FLOAT: left" src="http://www.resolvingdiscoverydisputes.com/Boxing%20Women.jpg" alt="Boxing Women.jpg" width="256" height="208" />You have been served with the Motion to Compel Further Responses with a <a href="http://www.resolvingdiscoverydisputes.com/Separate%20Statement%20of%20Items%20in%20Dispute.pdf">Separate Statement of Items in Dispute (pdf)</a> the size of your fist and your response is due in two weeks.&nbsp; Now what do you do? First, take a deep breath.&nbsp; This is the time you decide when to <a href="http://www.ilike.com/artist/Kenny+Rogers/track/Know+When+to+Hold+'Em">&ldquo;hold them and when to fold them&rdquo;</a> because how you respond may end up setting the tone between you and opposing counsel for the entire case.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</p>
<p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">Look at the <a href="http://www.resolvingdiscoverydisputes.com/Separate%20Statement%20of%20Items%20in%20Dispute.pdf">Separate Statement of Items in Dispute (pdf)</a>&nbsp;and determine whether or not you have any <a href="http://www.resolvingdiscoverydisputes.com/abuse/are-your-objections-garbage/">garbage objections</a>.&nbsp; If you do, offer to respond to those interrogatories, requests for admissions and/or requests for productions of documents by a date no later than when your opposition is due.</p>]]><![CDATA[<p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">If you strongly believe the interrogatories or requests are vague, ambiguous, overbroad and/or burdensome, this is the time to reach out to opposing counsel and explain in detail why you are having trouble responding to the discovery and give suggestions on how they should rewrite the interrogatories and/or requests.&nbsp; <em><strong>Do this in writing as soon as possible</strong></em>.&nbsp; If you don&rsquo;t get a satisfactory resolution on these items, you then can drop your arguments into your opposition.&nbsp;</p>
<p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">Claims of privileges must be protected by the attorney, but remember that they are generally narrowly construed.&nbsp; The work product doctrine and the right of privacy are another story.&nbsp; These objections are not privileges and can be overruled--except for absolute work product--if there is a showing that the discovery is necessary for a fair resolution of the lawsuit.&nbsp; See <a href="http://www.resolvingdiscoverydisputes.com/Moskowitz%20v.%20Superior%20Court%20%281982%29%20137%20C.A.%203d%20313%20%28pdf%29.pdf">Moskowitz v. Superior Court (1982) 137 C.A. 3d 313 (pdf)</a>, 316.&nbsp; Also, the California Supreme Court is reviewing the scope of the work product doctrine in the case of&nbsp; <a href="http://www.resolvingdiscoverydisputes.com/Coitto.pdf">Coito v. Superior Court (2010)182 Cal. App. 4th 758(pdf)</a>.&nbsp;&nbsp; Consider negotiating a <a href="http://www.discoveryreferee.com/documents/protectiveorder.pdf">protective order </a>&nbsp;with opposing counsel as a court most likely would grant one in the cases involving privilege,&nbsp; work product doctrine or the right of privacy.</p>
<p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">If all else fails, prepare your opposition.&nbsp; Follow the same advice given in the previous blog <a href="http://www.resolvingdiscoverydisputes.com/45-day-rule/what-should-your-discovery-motions-look-like/">&ldquo;What Your Discovery Motion Should Look Like.&rdquo;&nbsp;&nbsp;</a>However, one additional piece of advice&ndash;though the code does not require it, you should prepare your own <a href="http://www.resolvingdiscoverydisputes.com/Separate%20Statement%20of%20Items%20in%20Dispute.pdf">Separate Statement of Items in Dispute (pdf)</a>. This document is <strong><em>GOLDEN </em></strong>because this will become the first document the court reviews in deciding&nbsp;the motion as it will have all the information the court needs in this one document.&nbsp; Your <a href="http://www.resolvingdiscoverydisputes.com/Separate%20Statement%20of%20Items%20in%20Dispute.pdf">Separate Statement of Items in Dispute (pdf)</a>&nbsp;headings should look like this:</p>
<p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; PADDING-LEFT: 30px"><span style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline"><strong>Form Interrogatory #12.1:</strong></span>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; State the request or interrogatory verbatim.</p>
<p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; PADDING-LEFT: 30px"><span style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline"><strong>Response:</strong></span>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;State your&nbsp;response verbatim.</p>
<p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; PADDING-LEFT: 30px"><span style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline"><strong>Supplemental Response (provide dates):</strong></span>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; State any supplemental response verbatim.</p>
<p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; PADDING-LEFT: 30px"><span style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline"><strong>Why There Should Be a Further Response:</strong></span>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; State moving papers&rsquo; <a href="http://www.resolvingdiscoverydisputes.com/Separate%20Statement%20of%20Items%20in%20Dispute.pdf">Separate Statement of Items in Dispute (pdf)</a>&nbsp;arguments verbatim.</p>
<p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; PADDING-LEFT: 30px"><span style="TEXT-DECORATION: underline"><strong>Why There Should Not be a Further Response:</strong></span>&nbsp;&nbsp; Do not use conclusory statements. You need to be <strong><em>very</em></strong> specific in the law and the applicability of the law to your case if you are not responding to the discovery on claims of privilege, work product and/or privacy.&nbsp;&nbsp; If you are arguing that your objections are not garbage objections, and then explain in detail why.</p>
<p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">The final piece is your declaration.&nbsp; Again, the same advice applies as what was given in the previous blog <a href="http://www.resolvingdiscoverydisputes.com/45-day-rule/what-should-your-discovery-motions-look-like/">&ldquo;What Your Discovery Motion Should Look Like.&rdquo;&nbsp;&nbsp;</a>&nbsp; However, if the moving papers are requesting <a href="http://www.resolvingdiscoverydisputes.com/privileges/doctor-patient/sanctions--denied/">sanctions </a>then you must address this full on.&nbsp; Describe how you &ldquo;<strong><em>acted with substantial justification</em></strong>&rdquo; in objecting to the discovery and opposing the motion.&nbsp; Detail your entire meet and confer efforts (i.e., explained the problems with the interrogatory/request, offered to respond to the discovery if everyone could agree to a <a href="http://www.discoveryreferee.com/documents/protectiveorder.pdf">protective&nbsp;order</a>, etc.)&nbsp; Don&rsquo;t forget to request <a href="http://www.resolvingdiscoverydisputes.com/privileges/doctor-patient/sanctions--denied/">sanctions</a> yourself for all the time you have spent in trying to come to a resolution and in opposing the motion.</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.resolvingdiscoverydisputes.com/45-day-rule/compel-further-responses-1/game-on-the-opposition/</link>
         <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.resolvingdiscoverydisputes.com/45-day-rule/compel-further-responses-1/game-on-the-opposition/</guid>
         <category domain="http://www.resolvingdiscoverydisputes.com/">Abuse</category><category domain="http://www.resolvingdiscoverydisputes.com/45-day-rule">Compel Further Responses</category><category domain="http://www.resolvingdiscoverydisputes.com/">Motions</category><category domain="http://www.resolvingdiscoverydisputes.com/">Privileges</category><category domain="http://www.resolvingdiscoverydisputes.com/privileges">Right of Privacy</category><category domain="http://www.resolvingdiscoverydisputes.com/">Sanctions</category><category domain="http://www.resolvingdiscoverydisputes.com/privileges">Work Product</category>
         <pubDate>Thu, 09 Sep 2010 10:30:00 -0800</pubDate>
         <dc:creator>Katherine Gallo</dc:creator>
      </item>
      
      <item>
         <title>SANCTIONS--DENIED!!!</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p><img style="text-align: center; margin: 0px auto 20px; display: block; vertical-align: middle;" src="http://www.resolvingdiscoverydisputes.com/Sanction%20Judge.jpg" alt="Sanction Judge.jpg" width="375" height="250" /></p>
<p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">When I started this blog I asked fellow attorneys what issues they would like me to address.&nbsp; I received this response from a lawyer in San Francisco:&nbsp;</p>
<blockquote>
<p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">Key problem &ndash; judges that won't crack down on parties that lodge bogus objections and don't answer interrogs, and object to discovery demands that are straight forward. Amount of sanctions awarded is usually pitiful.&nbsp;</p>
</blockquote>]]><![CDATA[<p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">I can easily respond to this complaint by saying &ldquo;Judges want to be liked,&rdquo; or &ldquo;Maybe the judge was intimidated by the big law firm&rdquo; or &ldquo;The judge is trying to establish a working relationship with the parties and awarding sanctions makes the losing party more hostile&rdquo; or &ldquo;The judge may have seen fault on both sides of the table.&rdquo;&nbsp; However, the bottom line is I don&rsquo;t know why your judge didn&rsquo;t give you sanctions and neither do you, unless you argued the issue at the hearing.&nbsp;</p>
<p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">In order to overcome the reluctance of the judge, you need to be proactive in your moving papers and your arguments at the hearing regarding your request for sanctions.&nbsp; Don&rsquo;t be timid on asserting your position on this.&nbsp; It is just as important as your other arguments<em>.&nbsp;&nbsp;</em>Filing motions and the imposition of sanctions curbs discovery abuse and the 1986 Discovery Act recognizes this.&nbsp; Thus you need to bring the motion and start establishing a pattern of opposing counsel&rsquo;s discovery abuse and create a record&nbsp;of an imposition of sanctions.&nbsp;&nbsp;Moreover, remember that judges are reluctant to impose a terminating sanction unless a history of lesser sanctions have first been imposed or prior discovery orders have been violated. See Weil and Brown, <em>California Practice Guide: Civil Procedure Before Trial</em> (TRG 2009) &para; 8:1215 <em>et seq.&nbsp;&nbsp; </em></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong><em>When seeking an order to recover sanctions, <a href="http://www.resolvingdiscoverydisputes.com/Cal%20Code%20Civ%20Proc%20%C2%A7%202023.040.pdf">C.C.P &sect;2023.040 (pdf)</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;requires your &nbsp;discovery motion&nbsp;to contain the following:</em></strong></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; padding-left: 30px;"><em><strong>Notice</strong></em><strong> </strong>--The notice of motion must expressly state that you are seeking [monetary, issue, evidence or terminating] sanctions as well as the identity of the person, party or attorney against whom sanctions are being sought.&nbsp;</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; padding-left: 30px;"><em><strong>Points and Authorities</strong></em>&ndash;Your moving papers must state the facts of the noncompliance, the authority as to why it is discoverable and the authority for the award of sanctions.&nbsp; Don&rsquo;t make the argument requesting sanctions in your P&rsquo;s and A&rsquo;s an afterthought.&nbsp; Spend time on it.&nbsp; List all the <a href="http://www.resolvingdiscoverydisputes.com/abuse/are-your-objections-garbage/">garbage objections</a> to very basic questions and the law&rsquo;s supporting your interrogatory or request. For example: &ldquo;The identity and location of witnesses are not protected by attorney work product or the right of privacy.&nbsp; <a href="http://www.resolvingdiscoverydisputes.com/CCP%202017-010.pdf">C.C.P. &sect;2017.010 (pdf)</a>&nbsp;clearly states that the identity and location of witnesses are discoverable.&rdquo;&nbsp;&nbsp; Detail all the stonewalling, hostility and lack of good faith efforts during the meet and confer process.&nbsp; Make it clear that <a href="http://www.resolvingdiscoverydisputes.com/sanctions/interrogatories--you-have-an-obligation-to-respond-in-good-faith/">your train has not left the station </a>and you are losing precious trial prep time.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Make sure you site the authority for the sanctions you are requesting.&nbsp;</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; padding-left: 30px;"><em><strong>Declaration</strong></em>--Declarations need to state (1) facts of the noncompliance and discovery abuse in which the declaring party has personal knowledge (If necessary use multiple declarations) (2) the meet and confer process, (3) time you have spent and are going to spend on each aspect of the motion, (4) your hourly rate&nbsp; and (5) the calculations for the sanctions.&nbsp; Again, do it in detail!!&nbsp; <strong>Hint:&nbsp;</strong> Do not&nbsp;cut your hours.&nbsp; You need to let the judge know how much money this discovery dispute is costing your client.&nbsp;</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">&nbsp;<em><strong>In your&nbsp;moving papers point out to the court:</strong></em></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; padding-left: 30px;"><em><a href="http://www.resolvingdiscoverydisputes.com/Cal%20Code%20Civ%20Proc%20%C2%A7%202023.030%20%282010%29.pdf">C.C.P. &sect;2023.030 (pdf)</a></em><em>(a) &nbsp;</em>states that<em> </em>&ldquo;If a monetary sanction is authorized by any provision of this title (and almost all of them are), the court <strong>shall</strong> 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.&rdquo; <em>&nbsp;</em>[Emphasis added]<em></em></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; padding-left: 30px;">The purpose of discovery sanctions is not to provide a weapon for punishment, forfeiture, and the avoidance of the trial on the merits, but to prevent abuse of the discovery process and correct the problem presented.&nbsp; <em>California Discovery Citations </em>(TRG 2010) &para;1:6 citing <a href="http://www.resolvingdiscoverydisputes.com/Parker%20v.%20Wolters%20Kauwer%20U.S.%2C%20Inc.%20%282007%29%20149%20Cal.%20Ap.%204th%20285.pdf">Parker v. Wolters Kauwer U.S., Inc. (2007) 149 CA4th 285 (pdf)</a> at 301.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; padding-left: 30px;">Discovery sanctions are not a windfall.&nbsp; They are to compensate for costs and fees incurred by the party in enforcing discovery or defending a meritless motion.&nbsp; See&nbsp;Weil and Brown, <em>California Practice Guide: Civil Procedure Before Trial</em> (TRG 2009) &para;8:1213 citing <a href="http://www.resolvingdiscoverydisputes.com/Caryl%20richards.pdf">Caryl Richards, Inc. v. Superior Court (1961) CA2d 300</a> at 303.&nbsp;</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; padding-left: 30px;">Discovery sanctions are not reported to the State Bar. See <a href="http://www.resolvingdiscoverydisputes.com/6068.pdf">Bus. &amp; Prof. Code. &sect;6068(o)(3) (pdf)</a>.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; padding-left: 30px;">The&nbsp;&ldquo;trial court is not required to make findings at all&rdquo; in granting any discovery sanctions, including terminating sanctions.&nbsp; See Weil and Brown, <em>California Practice Guide: Civil Procedure Before Trial</em> (TRG 2009) &para;8:1241.5 citing <a href="http://www.resolvingdiscoverydisputes.com/Ghanooni%20v.%20Super%20Shuttle%20of%20Los%20Angeles.pdf">Ghanooni v. Super Shuttle of Los Angeles (1993) 20 CA 4th 256 (pdf)</a> at 261.&nbsp;</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>&nbsp;At the hearing:</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; padding-left: 30px;">Be prepared to argue for sanctions.&nbsp; Do not be afraid to make a record.&nbsp; If you think that the judge is still reluctant to give you sanctions, then suggest that the sanctions be stayed to be lifted by the court at a later date (i.e., when the party complies with the order or, the one I like to use, by the trial judge.).&nbsp; This is &nbsp;important, because you need to establish a history of abuse.&nbsp;&nbsp;Past conduct that has already been considered by the court cannot be the basis for additional sanctions. See Weil and Brown, <em>California Practice Guide: Civil Procedure Before Trial (</em>TRG 2009) &para;8:1209a citing <a href="http://www.resolvingdiscoverydisputes.com/Andrus%20v.%20Estrada%20%281995%29%2039%20CA4th%201030.pdf">Andrus v. Estrada (1995) 39 CA4th 1030 (pdf)</a>&nbsp;at 1043.&nbsp;</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">The court needs to take discovery motions seriously.&nbsp; They impact a case just as much as and in many cases&nbsp; more than demurrers and &nbsp;motions for summary judgment.&nbsp; However, it is your job to educate the judge as to why you are entitled to sanctions.&nbsp;&nbsp; Good luck!!</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>&nbsp;Let us know if &nbsp;you are successful in your next quest for discovery sanctions.&nbsp;</strong>&nbsp;</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.resolvingdiscoverydisputes.com/privileges/doctor-patient/sanctions--denied/</link>
         <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.resolvingdiscoverydisputes.com/privileges/doctor-patient/sanctions--denied/</guid>
         <category domain="http://www.resolvingdiscoverydisputes.com/">Abuse</category><category domain="http://www.resolvingdiscoverydisputes.com/45-day-rule">Compel Further Responses</category><category domain="http://www.resolvingdiscoverydisputes.com/privileges">Doctor Patient</category><category domain="http://www.resolvingdiscoverydisputes.com/">Meet and Confer</category><category domain="http://www.resolvingdiscoverydisputes.com/45-day-rule">Motions to Compel</category><category domain="http://www.resolvingdiscoverydisputes.com/">Objections</category><category domain="http://www.resolvingdiscoverydisputes.com/privileges">Right of Privacy</category><category domain="http://www.resolvingdiscoverydisputes.com/">Sanctions</category>
         <pubDate>Fri, 20 Aug 2010 12:23:06 -0800</pubDate>
         <dc:creator>Katherine Gallo</dc:creator>
      </item>
      
   </channel>
</rss>
