Robinson

Robinson v. City of San Diego

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaOctober 11, 20193:18-cv-01918California1,035 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 Case No.: 18-cv-1918-AJB-AGS Jeffrey ROBINSON, ORDER IMPOSING SANCTIONS ON

ATTORNEY DARYL G. CROUSE

Plaintiff, v. CITY OF SAN DIEGO, et al., Defendants. 17 Plaintiff’s counsel Daryl G. Crouse failed to appear at two Court-ordered hearings and did not provide a satisfactory reason for those absences. The Court concludes that he must be sanctioned. BACKGROUND A. Early Proceedings and First Show-Cause Hearing In February 2019, Crouse failed to respond to defense counsel’s emails to arrange the Rule 26(f) conference. (ECF No. 12, at 1.) Crouse ultimately failed to participate in the February 27, 2019 Rule 26(f) conference and failed to contribute to the Joint Discovery Plan, which the defense filed alone on March 11, 2019. (ECF No. 11, at 3; ECF No. 12, at 1; ECF No. 17.) That same day, Crouse failed to submit the Court-ordered Early Neutral Evaluation…

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.