DO

DO v. Superior Court

Good Law
109 Cal. App. 4th 404·134 Cal. Rptr. 2d 734
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 18, 2003G031415California3,145 words

Opinion

Opinion

Eric T. Smith for Real Party in Interest.

Rehearing Granted June 18, 2003. See 135 Cal.Rptr.2d 855 .

RYLAARSDAM, J.

Steven P. Rice is the attorney for petitioner Christie Julie Do, the defendant in the trial court. Because Do is indigent, Rice is representing her free of charge. Petitioner seeks relief from an order denying her request for monetary discovery sanctions. Even though plaintiff, real party in interest Quang Thanh Nguyen, twice failed to appear for noticed depositions, the court denied the request concluding it had no power to order sanctions in favor of a party represented by a lawyer acting without charge. We disagree with this conclusion and therefore issue a writ of mandate ordering the trial court to award monetary sanctions to petitioner.

The Public Law Center (PLC), a nonprofit public interest law firm sponsored by the Orange County Bar Association, solicits members of that association to represent indigent litigants free of charge. When real party sued petitioner, an indigent, non-English speaking immigrant, alleging breach of a loan agreement, petitioner sought the assistance of PLC. PLC helped her prepare and file an answer asserting the written loan…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.