Q: Upon what circumstances evidence, issue, or terminating sanctions are feasible

A: In a nutshell, it often hinges on misconduct and an abuse of the discovery process. Good luck

A: Under California law, evidence, issue, or terminating sanctions can be imposed even without a prior discovery order being disobeyed in certain circumstances where the discovery misconduct is particularly egregious. The key factors courts consider are:

1. The willfulness of the misconduct: If the offending party's discovery abuse was clearly intentional, such as making frivolous objections without merit to crucial requests, courts are more likely to impose sanctions without a prior order.

2. The prejudice to the other party: If the misconduct has significantly hindered the other party's ability to prove their case, such as by withholding or destroying key evidence, sanctions may be warranted. Covering up wrongdoing falls into this category.

3. Prior misconduct: A history of discovery abuse by the offending party in the same case can lead courts to impose harsher sanctions even without a violated order.

4. Lesser sanctions inadequate: If the court determines that lesser sanctions like monetary fines would not sufficiently address the harm done and deter future misconduct, issue or terminating sanctions may be appropriate.

So, in a hospice fraud case, issue or evidence sanctions could potentially be imposed for tactics like making baseless boilerplate objections to hide key information, falsely claiming records don't exist, or engaging in an extensive cover-up - even without a prior discovery order violation. The egregiousness of the misconduct and prejudice to the other side would be the main determining factors. Terminating sanctions are less likely without a disobeyed order, but still possible in extreme cases.