On June 01, 2016 a
Motion-Secondary
was filed
involving a dispute between
Dbp Investments,
King Plaza Center, Llc,
and
Does 1 - 10, Inclusive,
King Plaza Center,Llc,
Lai, Thanh,
Lien, Sovan,
Quach, Bua,
Voung, Dong,
for (26) Unlimited Other Real Property
in the District Court of San Mateo County.
Preview
STEVEN B. PISER, SBN 62414
LAW OFFICES OF STEVEN B. PISER
A Professional Corporation
1300 Clay Street, Suite 1050
Oakland, California 94612
Telephone: (510) 835-5582
Facsimile:
kOOOVCDOT-PCOIOI—I
(510) 832—1717
Ey 4;
mam .
amt ‘
JOHN L. FITZGERALD, SBN 126613
LAW OFFICES OF JOHN L. FITZGERALD
101 California Street, Suite 2300
San Francisco, California 94111
Telephone: (415) 689-1209
Attorneys for
DBP INVESTMENTS,
a California General Partnership
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN MATEO
DBP INVESTMENTS, a California General ) CASE NO. CIV538897
Partnership, )
)
Plaintifif ) MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND
) AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR
v.
MNNMNNNMNl—‘l—‘I—lb—‘l—‘I—‘l—‘i—II—‘H
) ISSUE AND MONETARY SANCTIONS AGAINST
) DEFENDANTS, BUA-QUACH, SOVAN LIEN,
KING PLAZA CENTER, LLC, a Delaware ) DONG VUONG AND THANH LAI
Limited Liability Company, BUA—QUACH, )
an individual, SOVAN LIEN,
ooqowm-Dos—ooooqomwwI—Ao
an individual, ) DATE AUGUST 10, 2017
DONG VUONG, an individual, THANH ) TIME 9:00 A.M.
LAI, and DOES 1 through 10 DEPT. LAW & MOTION
3 TRIAL NOVEMBER 13, 2017
Defendants. )
)
KING PLAZA CENTER, LLC, a Delaware ) BY
Limited Liability Company, FAX
) GIV538897
) MPAS
Memorandum Points and Authorities in Sun
Cross~CompZainant, )
01
v. )
).
DBP INVESTMENTS, a California General ) I IlllllllllllllllllllIII
Partnership and ROES 1 through 10,
3
Cross—Defendants. )
)
It is a misuse of the discovery process to disobey a court order to provide discovery.
Lmv Offices of
Steven B. Piser MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR ISSUE AND MONETARY SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANTS, BUA-
QUACH, SOVAN LIEN, DONG VUONG AND THANH LAI
C.C.P. §2023.010(g)
Defendants were ordered to provide further response to interrogatory 15.1 as it relates to
the bases for their denial of the material allegations of the complaint. They did not.
Where there is a misuse of the discovery process, the court has the power and duty to
OOOVIONCfl-POOLOT—I
impose monetary and issue sanctions. C.C.P. § 2023.030 (a) and (b).
Issue, evidence and monetary sanctions are within the court’s discretion where a party
fails to obey an order compelling further answers. C.C.P. § 2030.3 00(e).
This is not these defendants’ first encounter with this court as it relates to discovery. The
history is well-documented:
O
5.4 o On February 16, 2017, this court issued an order compelling further
11 responses to DBP’s request for production and sanctions of $446.25.
12 0 On March 27, 2017, the court granted DBP’s request for sanctions, while
13 denying DBP’s motion to compel compliance with an inspection demand.
14 The court noted defendants’ original response said they had documents to
15 produce, a later response said there were none. So, the motion was moot.
16 But in addition to the sanctions against these same defendants, the court
17 ordered filrther, code compliant, responses.
18 0 Finally, on May 16, 2017, the court ordered further responses to
19 interrogatory 15.1, which is the basis for this motion.
20 These defendants have ignored the rules. They are serial discovery abusers, finding it
21 more beneficial to their case to stonewall discovery and pay the monetary sanctions rather than
22 do what is required. They will continue to do so unless this court sends a clear message. The
23 only just message is the imposition of the issue and monetary sanctions as described in the
24 separate statement and declaration of Steven B. Piser.
25 LA . OFFICES OF STEVEN B. PISER
A Pr es ional Corporation
26
DATED: July @2017 By:
27
STE EN B. PISER
28 Attorney for DBP INVESTMENTS
Lmv Offices of 2
Steven B. Piser MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR Issue AND MONETARY SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANTS, BUA-
QUACH, SOVAN LIEN, DONG VUONG AND THANH LAT
Preview
STEVEN B. PISER, SBN 62414 LAW OFFICES OF STEVEN B. PISER A Professional Corporation 1300 Clay Street, Suite 1050 Oakland, California 94612 Telephone: (510) 835-5582 Facsimile: kOOOVCDOT-PCOIOI—I (510) 832—1717 Ey 4; mam . amt ‘ JOHN L. FITZGERALD, SBN 126613 LAW OFFICES OF JOHN L. FITZGERALD 101 California Street, Suite 2300 San Francisco, California 94111 Telephone: (415) 689-1209 Attorneys for DBP INVESTMENTS, a California General Partnership IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN MATEO DBP INVESTMENTS, a California General ) CASE NO. CIV538897 Partnership, ) ) Plaintifif ) MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND ) AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR v. MNNMNNNMNl—‘l—‘I—lb—‘l—‘I—‘l—‘i—II—‘H ) ISSUE AND MONETARY SANCTIONS AGAINST ) DEFENDANTS, BUA-QUACH, SOVAN LIEN, KING PLAZA CENTER, LLC, a Delaware ) DONG VUONG AND THANH LAI Limited Liability Company, BUA—QUACH, ) an individual, SOVAN LIEN, ooqowm-Dos—ooooqomwwI—Ao an individual, ) DATE AUGUST 10, 2017 DONG VUONG, an individual, THANH ) TIME 9:00 A.M. LAI, and DOES 1 through 10 DEPT. LAW & MOTION 3 TRIAL NOVEMBER 13, 2017 Defendants. ) ) KING PLAZA CENTER, LLC, a Delaware ) BY Limited Liability Company, FAX ) GIV538897 ) MPAS Memorandum Points and Authorities in Sun Cross~CompZainant, ) 01 v. ) ). DBP INVESTMENTS, a California General ) I IlllllllllllllllllllIII Partnership and ROES 1 through 10, 3 Cross—Defendants. ) ) It is a misuse of the discovery process to disobey a court order to provide discovery. Lmv Offices of Steven B. Piser MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR ISSUE AND MONETARY SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANTS, BUA- QUACH, SOVAN LIEN, DONG VUONG AND THANH LAI C.C.P. §2023.010(g) Defendants were ordered to provide further response to interrogatory 15.1 as it relates to the bases for their denial of the material allegations of the complaint. They did not. Where there is a misuse of the discovery process, the court has the power and duty to OOOVIONCfl-POOLOT—I impose monetary and issue sanctions. C.C.P. § 2023.030 (a) and (b). Issue, evidence and monetary sanctions are within the court’s discretion where a party fails to obey an order compelling further answers. C.C.P. § 2030.3 00(e). This is not these defendants’ first encounter with this court as it relates to discovery. The history is well-documented: O 5.4 o On February 16, 2017, this court issued an order compelling further 11 responses to DBP’s request for production and sanctions of $446.25. 12 0 On March 27, 2017, the court granted DBP’s request for sanctions, while 13 denying DBP’s motion to compel compliance with an inspection demand. 14 The court noted defendants’ original response said they had documents to 15 produce, a later response said there were none. So, the motion was moot. 16 But in addition to the sanctions against these same defendants, the court 17 ordered filrther, code compliant, responses. 18 0 Finally, on May 16, 2017, the court ordered further responses to 19 interrogatory 15.1, which is the basis for this motion. 20 These defendants have ignored the rules. They are serial discovery abusers, finding it 21 more beneficial to their case to stonewall discovery and pay the monetary sanctions rather than 22 do what is required. They will continue to do so unless this court sends a clear message. The 23 only just message is the imposition of the issue and monetary sanctions as described in the 24 separate statement and declaration of Steven B. Piser. 25 LA . OFFICES OF STEVEN B. PISER A Pr es ional Corporation 26 DATED: July @2017 By: 27 STE EN B. PISER 28 Attorney for DBP INVESTMENTS Lmv Offices of 2 Steven B. Piser MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR Issue AND MONETARY SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANTS, BUA- QUACH, SOVAN LIEN, DONG VUONG AND THANH LAT