Q: Issue or evidence sanctiins
If defendant boilerplate objected without merit to provide specific response to identify particular person who did wrongdoing, should issue or evidence sanctions be imposed in addition to compelled response? Meaning-- direct acceptance of liability.
A:
In California, when a defendant provides boilerplate objections without merit and fails to provide a specific response identifying the particular person who committed the alleged wrongdoing, the court may consider imposing issue or evidence sanctions in addition to compelling a proper response. However, the decision to impose such sanctions depends on the specific circumstances of the case and the court's discretion.
Issue sanctions and evidence sanctions are governed by California Code of Civil Procedure (CCP) sections 2023.030 and 2023.040. These sanctions can be imposed when a party engages in misuse of the discovery process, which may include providing evasive or incomplete responses to discovery requests.
1. Issue sanctions (CCP § 2023.030(b)): The court may order that certain facts related to the discovery abuse be taken as established for the purposes of the action. This could potentially lead to the direct acceptance of liability in some cases.
2. Evidence sanctions (CCP § 2023.030(c)): The court may prohibit the offending party from introducing certain matters into evidence or supporting or opposing designated claims or defenses.
Before imposing such sanctions, the court will typically consider factors such as the severity of the discovery abuse, the party's willfulness in providing inadequate responses, and the potential prejudice to the opposing party. The court may also consider whether the discovery abuse is part of a larger pattern of misconduct.
It is important to note that imposing issue or evidence sanctions is a serious matter and is not automatic. The court will generally provide the offending party with an opportunity to comply with the discovery request and provide a proper response before considering such sanctions. Additionally, the party seeking sanctions must typically demonstrate that they have attempted to resolve the discovery dispute through meet-and-confer efforts before seeking court intervention.
Ultimately, the decision to impose issue or evidence sanctions, including the direct acceptance of liability, will depend on the specific facts of the case and the court's assessment of the appropriate remedy for the discovery abuse.
Justia Ask a Lawyer is a forum for consumers to get answers to basic legal questions. Any information sent through Justia Ask a Lawyer is not secure and is done so on a non-confidential basis only.
The use of this website to ask questions or receive answers does not create an attorney–client relationship between you and Justia, or between you and any attorney who receives your information or responds to your questions, nor is it intended to create such a relationship. Additionally, no responses on this forum constitute legal advice, which must be tailored to the specific circumstances of each case. You should not act upon information provided in Justia Ask a Lawyer without seeking professional counsel from an attorney admitted or authorized to practice in your jurisdiction. Justia assumes no responsibility to any person who relies on information contained on or received through this site and disclaims all liability in respect to such information.
Justia cannot guarantee that the information on this website (including any legal information provided by an attorney through this service) is accurate, complete, or up-to-date. While we intend to make every attempt to keep the information on this site current, the owners of and contributors to this site make no claims, promises or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness or adequacy of the information contained in or linked to from this site.
