242 Cal. App. 4th 1265
Cal. Ct. App.2015Background
- Plaintiff Douglas J. Crawford sued Chase, its investment advisor Shruti Kohli, and a branch president for claims arising from a rescinded annuity purchased by his elderly mother; he sought lost interest.
- Crawford noticed depositions to occur at his home; defendants objected and declined to attend, citing safety concerns based on Crawford’s filings referencing violent acts.
- Crawford filed separate small claims actions against the deponents and defense counsel for failure to appear on subpoenaed depositions; the trial court transferred and consolidated those actions into the main case.
- Repeated efforts to depose Crawford’s brother Matthew resulted in walkouts; the court ordered a videotaped deposition and sanctioned Crawford $1,600 for noncompliance.
- At the rescheduled deposition Crawford (acting as his brother’s counsel) brandished pepper spray and a stun gun, threatened opposing counsel, and discharged the stun device; the deposition was terminated and defendants moved for terminating sanctions.
- The trial court granted terminating sanctions (dismissal) citing threats, contemptuous filings, failure to pay prior sanctions, and obstructive discovery conduct; the Court of Appeal affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether terminating sanctions (dismissal) were proper | Court abused discretion by ordering Matthew’s deposition; absent that order no basis for termination | Crawford’s threats and obstructive conduct made lesser sanctions insufficient; dismissal warranted in extreme cases | Affirmed: inherent authority permits dismissal where conduct is extreme and no lesser sanction would suffice (termination proper) |
| Whether trial judge lacked jurisdiction because disqualification was unresolved | Judge’s affidavit raised qualification issue; until independent determination judge was powerless | Statement of disqualification was untimely and facially insufficient; striking it left no basis for independent review | Affirmed: striking the untimely/insufficient disqualification removed any jurisdictional bar to acting |
| Whether small claims actions could remain separate rather than be transferred/consolidated | Crawford relied on remedies under CCP §1992 to pursue independent small claims actions for subpoena violations | Discovery issues belong to the department assigned to the superior court action; small claims has no jurisdiction over those discovery matters | Affirmed: small claims actions were properly transferred and consolidated into the superior court action |
| Whether trial court erred in imposing monetary discovery sanctions given alleged failure to meet-and-confer | Crawford argued defendants failed to file required meet-and-confer declarations, so sanctions improper | Defendants noted attempts and court found informal resolution futile given Crawford’s conduct; failure to raise meet-and-confer below forfeited appellate review | Affirmed: Crawford forfeited the issue on appeal and informal resolution was not required where futile/dangerous |
Key Cases Cited
- Green v. GTE California, Inc., 29 Cal.App.4th 407 (1994) (illustrative of uncivil deposition conduct)
- In re Koven, 134 Cal.App.4th 262 (2005) (discipline and consequences for attorney misconduct)
- Del Junco v. Hufnagel, 150 Cal.App.4th 789 (2007) (courts’ inherent authority to dismiss as a sanction in extreme cases)
- Sav-On Drugs, Inc. v. Superior Court, 15 Cal.3d 1 (1975) (remedy for erroneous discovery order is appeal/writ, not disobedience)
- Williams v. Superior Court, 14 Cal.2d 656 (1939) (department assigned to a case controls discovery jurisdiction)
- Acuna v. Gunderson Chevrolet, Inc., 19 Cal.App.4th 1467 (1993) (limits on transfer/consolidation between small claims and superior court departments)
- New York Times Co. v. Superior Court, 51 Cal.3d 453 (1990) (scope of remedies for subpoena noncompliance and context for §1992 sanctions)
- Sutherland v. Barclays American/Mortgage Corp., 53 Cal.App.4th 299 (1997) (law does not require futile acts such as meet-and-confer where useless or dangerous)