Sanctions Fell Within “Unusual Forms Of Discovery Dispute” Situations Encompassed In PricewaterhouseCoopers Decision.
In City of Los Angeles v. PricewaterhouseCoopers, LLP, 17 Cal.5th 46, 72-74 (2024), the California Supreme Court determined that the inherent authority of the court could allow for imposition of discovery sanctions, independent of express Discovery Act provisions, where there were “unusual forms of discovery abuse.” We can now report that Agnone v. Agnone, Case No. B321252 (2d Dist., Div. 3 May 30, 2025) (partially published) is one of the first post-PricewaterhouseCoopers decisions in construing this language.
What the Agnone appellate court basically held is that an attorney representing a third-party witness under a deposition subpoena cannot play games by being present with the witness but refusing to turn on his camera at a virtual deposition in order to coach the third-party witness. This conduct fell “within the cracks,” fully justifying the $9,981 discovery sanctions award against the third-party witness—because it fell within the “unusual forms of discovery abuse” nuance.