Hartunian

Collisson & Kaplan v. Hartunian

Good Law
1994 Cal. App. LEXIS 55·21 Cal. App. 4th 1611·26 Cal. Rptr. 2d 786·94 Daily Journal DAR 916·94 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 596
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 24, 1994B072128California3,449 words

Opinion

Opinion

Masterson, J.

Steven Hartunian and Sumitomo Tower, Ltd. (defendants), attempted to derail a fast track case through evasive answers to discovery. As a sanction for this conduct, the trial court ordered defendants’ answer struck. Defendants appeal from the ensuing default judgment. We affirm the judgment and impose sanctions against defendants and their attorneys for having prosecuted a frivolous appeal.

Background

On October 18, 1991, Collisson & Kaplan (plaintiff) filed a complaint against defendants alleging various causes of action for nonpayment of legal fees. On November 18, 1991, defendants filed a general denial answer and raised 13 affirmative defenses.

On January 21, 1992, plaintiff served defendants with form and special interrogatories. On February 21, 1992, defendants filed verified responses to the form interrogatories. However, contrary to the requirements of Code of Civil Procedure section 2030, subdivision (g), the responses to the special interrogatories were not verified. As to the interrogatories concerning the facts underlying defendants’ general denial and affirmative defenses, each defendant repeatedly invoked the stock phrase: “Defendant is compiling the…

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.