Substantial Evidence Supported The Result, Not To Mention A $35,000 Reduction In Requested Fees Showed No Arbitrary Result.
Discovery disputes are contentious, and lower courts have a hard time on them based on the numerous issues that may be involved. However, they have no problems sanctioning for a failure to meet and confer. And that is what happened in HCMC Legal, Inc. v. Hartstein, Case No. B344266 (2d Dist., Div. 4 Feb. 11, 2026) (unpublished).
No reason to get into the weeds, because the record provided substantial evidence that the litigant requesting information from a third party did not meaningfully meet and confer, a determination reviewed for an abuse of discretion—a review standard which did not cut it in this case. The appellate court reminded everyone that argumentative assertions such as “what I want I want” are the not the same as an informal negotiation in a deliberative matter to reach a non-unilateral resolution, citing Townsend v. Superior Court, 61 Cal.App.4th 1431, 1437 (1998). With respect to the amount of the award, that was a no-brainer because the lower court reduced the request by $35,000 down to $20,000.