Preview
Bradley C. Gage, Esq. S.B. N0. 117808
Milad Sadr, Esq. S.B. N0. 245080
Wayne C. Smith, Esq., S.B. N0. 122535
LAW OFFICES OF GOLDBERG & GAGE-
A Partnership 0f Professional Law Corporations
23002 Victory Boulevard
©OOQO\Ul-I>UJN>—‘
Woodland Hills,California 91367
340-9252 Fax: (818) 340-9088
Tel: (818)
bgage@goldbergandgage.com; msadr@goldbergandgage.com
wsmith@g01dbergandgage.com
In Association With: ELECTRgNICOALLY IEDILED
Robert S. Brown Esq. S.B. No. 187845 SUPER' R C URT F CAL”: O RN'A
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO
ROBERT STANFORD BRO.“ N: AFC SAN BERNARDINO DISTRICT
3701 Wllshlre Boulevard, Sulte 1135
Los Angeles. CA 90010 1/3/2024 9:32 AM
745-8641 Fax: (213) 261-3906
Tel: (213)
rstanfordbrown@gmail.com By: LeSIie Zepeda, DEPUTY
Attorneys for Plaintiffs,
BRIAN PELLIS, JOHN VASEK
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO
BRIAN PELLIS, JOHN VASEK, CASE N0. C1VSB2226731
i _
(ASSIGNED T0 THE HON. JOSEPH T.
Plamtlffs, ORTIZ, DEPT. $17)
VS.
NNNNNNNNNr—tr—tr—tr—tr—tr—tr—tr—tr—tr—t
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AND DOES 1- PLAINTIFFS’ NOTICE 0F MOTION
100, INCLUSIVE AND MOTION T0 COMPEL
DEPOSITION 0F DARRIN GOODMAN;
Defendant REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS AGAINST
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AND ITS
OOQONLAJ>UJNHO©OOQQUIJ>UJNHO
ATTORNEYS OF RECORD ATKINSON,
ANDELSON, LOYA, RUUD & ROMO;
DECLARATION OF ROBERT S.
BROWN; EXHIBITS. FILED
CONCURRENTLY WITH PROPOSED
ORDER.
DATE: APRIL 16, 2024
TIME: 9:00 AM
DEPT: S17
DATE RESERVED.
(COMPLAINT FILED: 12/0 1/2022)
1
PLAINTIFFS’ NOTICE OFMOTION AND MOTION TO COMPEL DEPOSITIONS; REQUEST FOR
SANCTIONS AGAINST CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AND ITS ATTORNEYS OF RECORD
TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:
YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT on April 16, 2024 at 9:00 a.m., in Department
Sl7 0f this Court located at 247 West Third Street, San Bernardino, CA 92415-0210, Plaintiffs
will and hereby do move the Court for an order against Defendant City of San Bernardino and its
©OOQO\Ul-I>UJN>—‘
attorneys ATKINSON, ANDELSON, LOVA, RUUD & ROMO, jointly and severally for
Monetary Sanctions, as well as, Terminating Sanctions, Issues Sanctions and Evidentiary
Sanctions, for Failure t0 Produce witness, and city employee, Darrin Goodman for Deposition
0r in The Alternative t0 Compel Deposition of Darrin Goodman in Person at the Offices 0f
GOLDBERG and GAGE, as well as for Monetary Sanctions, Issues Sanctions and Evidentiary
Sanctions as further explained below:
Relief sought:
1. Monetary sanctions 0f $104,800.00 against Defendant City 0f San Bernardino,
and its Attorneys of Record Atkinson, Andelson, Loya, Ruud & Romo, jointly and severally t0
be paid Within 10 days of this hearing. This consists of a reduction in the actual amounts for
time spent 0n this motion of $4,800.00, plus an additional $100,000.00 for monetary sanctions
because 0f willful Violations 0f the Discovery Act. Defendants were previously sanctioned 0n
NNNNNNNNNr—tr—tr—tr—tr—tr—tr—tr—tr—tr—t
November 22, 2023, for failure t0 provide documents. Defendants have also failed t0 produce
documents in response t0 Request t0 Produce # 2, and failed t0 respond to Judicial Form
Interrogatories, both 0f which required other motions t0 compel. Moreover, we have additional
OOQONLAJ>UJNHO©OOQQUIJ>UJNHO
motions to compel depositions that are anticipated, although we hope that an IDC can resolve
those additional items.
2. Terminating sanctions with a default prove up hearing to be set at a time
convenient t0 the Court.
3. If terminating sanctions are not granted, there should be evidentiary and issues
sanctions as well as monetary sanctions.
4. As to evidentiary sanctions, we seek the following: (1) notification t0 the jury that
the defendant engaged in a willful misuse 0f the discovery process, failing to comply With their
obligation t0 timely provide information that could be helpful to the plaintiffs and harmful to the
2
PLAINTIFFS’ NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO COMPEL DEPOSITIONS; REQUEST FOR
SANCTIONS AGAINST CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AND ITS ATTORNEYS OF RECORD
Preview
Bradley C. Gage, Esq. S.B. N0. 117808 Milad Sadr, Esq. S.B. N0. 245080 Wayne C. Smith, Esq., S.B. N0. 122535 LAW OFFICES OF GOLDBERG & GAGE- A Partnership 0f Professional Law Corporations 23002 Victory Boulevard ©OOQO\Ul-I>UJN>—‘ Woodland Hills,California 91367 340-9252 Fax: (818) 340-9088 Tel: (818) bgage@goldbergandgage.com; msadr@goldbergandgage.com wsmith@g01dbergandgage.com In Association With: ELECTRgNICOALLY IEDILED Robert S. Brown Esq. S.B. No. 187845 SUPER' R C URT F CAL”: O RN'A COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO ROBERT STANFORD BRO.“ N: AFC SAN BERNARDINO DISTRICT 3701 Wllshlre Boulevard, Sulte 1135 Los Angeles. CA 90010 1/3/2024 9:32 AM 745-8641 Fax: (213) 261-3906 Tel: (213) rstanfordbrown@gmail.com By: LeSIie Zepeda, DEPUTY Attorneys for Plaintiffs, BRIAN PELLIS, JOHN VASEK SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO BRIAN PELLIS, JOHN VASEK, CASE N0. C1VSB2226731 i _ (ASSIGNED T0 THE HON. JOSEPH T. Plamtlffs, ORTIZ, DEPT. $17) VS. NNNNNNNNNr—tr—tr—tr—tr—tr—tr—tr—tr—tr—t CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AND DOES 1- PLAINTIFFS’ NOTICE 0F MOTION 100, INCLUSIVE AND MOTION T0 COMPEL DEPOSITION 0F DARRIN GOODMAN; Defendant REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS AGAINST CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AND ITS OOQONLAJ>UJNHO©OOQQUIJ>UJNHO ATTORNEYS OF RECORD ATKINSON, ANDELSON, LOYA, RUUD & ROMO; DECLARATION OF ROBERT S. BROWN; EXHIBITS. FILED CONCURRENTLY WITH PROPOSED ORDER. DATE: APRIL 16, 2024 TIME: 9:00 AM DEPT: S17 DATE RESERVED. (COMPLAINT FILED: 12/0 1/2022) 1 PLAINTIFFS’ NOTICE OFMOTION AND MOTION TO COMPEL DEPOSITIONS; REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS AGAINST CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AND ITS ATTORNEYS OF RECORD TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD: YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT on April 16, 2024 at 9:00 a.m., in Department Sl7 0f this Court located at 247 West Third Street, San Bernardino, CA 92415-0210, Plaintiffs will and hereby do move the Court for an order against Defendant City of San Bernardino and its ©OOQO\Ul-I>UJN>—‘ attorneys ATKINSON, ANDELSON, LOVA, RUUD & ROMO, jointly and severally for Monetary Sanctions, as well as, Terminating Sanctions, Issues Sanctions and Evidentiary Sanctions, for Failure t0 Produce witness, and city employee, Darrin Goodman for Deposition 0r in The Alternative t0 Compel Deposition of Darrin Goodman in Person at the Offices 0f GOLDBERG and GAGE, as well as for Monetary Sanctions, Issues Sanctions and Evidentiary Sanctions as further explained below: Relief sought: 1. Monetary sanctions 0f $104,800.00 against Defendant City 0f San Bernardino, and its Attorneys of Record Atkinson, Andelson, Loya, Ruud & Romo, jointly and severally t0 be paid Within 10 days of this hearing. This consists of a reduction in the actual amounts for time spent 0n this motion of $4,800.00, plus an additional $100,000.00 for monetary sanctions because 0f willful Violations 0f the Discovery Act. Defendants were previously sanctioned 0n NNNNNNNNNr—tr—tr—tr—tr—tr—tr—tr—tr—tr—t November 22, 2023, for failure t0 provide documents. Defendants have also failed t0 produce documents in response t0 Request t0 Produce # 2, and failed t0 respond to Judicial Form Interrogatories, both 0f which required other motions t0 compel. Moreover, we have additional OOQONLAJ>UJNHO©OOQQUIJ>UJNHO motions to compel depositions that are anticipated, although we hope that an IDC can resolve those additional items. 2. Terminating sanctions with a default prove up hearing to be set at a time convenient t0 the Court. 3. If terminating sanctions are not granted, there should be evidentiary and issues sanctions as well as monetary sanctions. 4. As to evidentiary sanctions, we seek the following: (1) notification t0 the jury that the defendant engaged in a willful misuse 0f the discovery process, failing to comply With their obligation t0 timely provide information that could be helpful to the plaintiffs and harmful to the 2 PLAINTIFFS’ NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO COMPEL DEPOSITIONS; REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS AGAINST CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AND ITS ATTORNEYS OF RECORD