Discovery Sanctions Were Vacated, With Litigant Also Substantially Complying With Document Production Requirements.
Plaintiff and his counsel were sanctioned $910 for misusing the discovery process, in Pollock v. Superior Court (Schuster), Case No. B321229 (2d Dist., Div. 1 July 31, 2023) (published), because plaintiff failed to specify what documents were being produced in the statement of compliance response to document requests. The 2/1 DCA issued a writ of mandate because nothing in the response requirements specified a listing of what documents being produced were correlative to each request. Further, with respect to production, plaintiff substantially complied by producing a later detailed table which did indicate the documents provided in a voluntary document exchange correlated to each document request. The $910 sanctions award was vacated and was ordered to be denied.