Plaintiff Agreed to Mediation, and Explanations For Failure to Attend Were Found Unpersuasive in Nature Under Abuse of Discretion Standard.
In Burke v Newegg Enterprises, Case No. B251187 (2d Dist., Div. 4 Nov. 5, 2014) (unpublished), plaintiff and her counsel in a FEHA case were hit with $8,160 in sanctions in favor of two defendants for failure to attend a court-ordered mediation. The basis for the sanctions order was CRC, rule 3.894 and various Los Angeles Superior Court Local Rules (namely, rules 3.272 and 3.10).
Plaintiff’s appeal was unsuccessful, largely because it was reviewed under the deferential abuse of discretion prism.
Artist: Bayard Taylor. 1856-1857. Library of Congress.
Plaintiff argued that she did not receive notice of the mediation, but the problem was that the mediator served a notice of assignment asking that certain action should be undertaken or else the mediation would be held on a certain date. Unfortunately for plaintiff and her attorneys, they never denied receipt of this notice, such that the failure to follow up was found dispositive as a ground to grant sanctions for mediation nonattendance.
