Ladies and Gentlemen,
Responding party refused to sign a response for production demand.
Moving party filed a written motion to compel signed under oath response.
During hearing the judge stated that
- the motion to compel responding party to sign response must be addressed to the Clerk, not to the court. The clerk of the court should compel responding party to sign. It is not a job for the judge. (There is no law allowing motions ruled by the court's Clerk)
- the judge will not allow using law bluntly in the court.
- the judge will not allow motions to compel responding party to sign response.

The judge denied motion with prejudice and sanctioned moving party for $2205.00 attorney's fee.

It is a limited civil case for $6000. The court reporter charges $500 to show up in the court. Based on financial reasons I did not hire court reporter.

Please advice.

PS. Few comments to clarify the fact and law:
- California CCP 2031.250 states that responding party shall sign response under oath and attorney shall sign objections. Responding party did not sign at all. Attorney signature is forged: attorney did not sign, but imprinted an image with appearance of signature.
- California CCP 2031.260 states that original response shall be served.
- Appleton v. Superior Court (1988): "Unsworn responses are tantamount to no responses at all". Therefore, as I understood, responding party did not respond at all.
- California CCP 2031.300 states that if responding party did not serve timely response, propounding party may file a motion to compel response. No "meet and confer" required.
- California Judges Benchbook, Civil Proceedings 2008 ed. §15.14: “If the response to inspection demands is hybrid, i.e., includes both responses and objections to the demands, and is unverified, the propounding party is entitled to an order compelling a verified response.”
* Last updated by: DMITRIY1 on 1/28/2021 @ 12:45 AM *

Hello.

I am sorry you experienced the sanctions.

Reading what you wrote and having been in front of judges for various reasons, let me say their ruling is usually going to stand as final unless there was an error on the judge's part.

An error is something you do.
A mistake is something you make.
A mistake is intentional.
An error is not intentional.

1. The party would not sign.
2. You filed a motion to compel signed response.
3. Judge said the motion to compel signed response had to be filed with the clerk.
4. You state there is no law allowing motions with the clerk.
5. The judge will not allow using the law bluntly in court
6.The judge did not allow motion to compel response in court.

Addressing the main thing taught in the class.
The rules rule.

Each time I start the course I read the start here section as Mr. Graves says.

I didn't want to because I have read it like 10 times because I haven't completed the course not even one time and I have renewed.

I read it because he knew each time I read it I would comprehend something he wrote better and better.

1. The party would not sign.
You point to code stating that if a party does not sign its the same as not responding.
The code says
An order to compel response
An order to compel verified response
are the two types of orders you can write.

Order to compel signed response is not shown.

Everything is specific so I hope it was a typo that you put "signed" esponse in this forum.

Court rules would state that all orders are to be filed with the clerk and would state how many days before a hearing it has to be filed and of course a certificate of service to show the other party was served

The other party can't show up in court and demand a thing of you and you have not been served a copy of an order to do something, that is filed with the clerk.

If you don't have a certificate of service filed with your order with the clerk, it was an ambush (in my opinion)

There is no law for what is filled with the clerk.
Court rules determine what is to be filed.

There are general court rules and local court rules and the judge has their own rules.

The course mention to know the rules specific to your area and use the course for general guidance.

Everything in court is done before you get to court.

The judge does not allow anything in court that is not of court record on paper.

You can ask for leave of court to take care of court issues, you can ask for continuance to have more time to take care of court issues but ultimately the case goes by the rules of court.

I'm sorry you were sanctioned and you may contact the court about a payment plan you can afford, but if it were the other way, I would not want an attorney to take advantage of you and not be sanctioned.

I wish I had better information to provide.

In this forum is a question

Can you object to an order a Judge writes after the fact?

Where Dr Graves suggested a motion for reconsideration ot a motion for rehearing.

Either if asked would not allow an appeal if you didn't file one if this was the court's final order.

One thing about the rules are it is fair.

Just like a judge can error so can a litigant.

Please think through how you will ask a judge to reconsider an order or how you will ask the judge for a rehearing after correcting the error of failing to file the motion with the clerk first.

I have read of sanctions being reversed before but I don't know in what context and the other side could appeal the reversal but that not your worry.

Your worry is to have an opportunity to do it right if you did an error.

Here is what I learned about error and mistakes and why appeals courts will hear errors on appeal.
A mistake would be when you do something and know that the result is wrong.
An error would be if you do or say the wrong thing but didn't know/realize it was wrong at the time.
Try to get a rehearing or reconsideration on the error if you can.

Hi Vivian,
Thank you for the response. I understood my mistake in my question.

The moving party (me) filed a motion and notice of hearing with the court in full compliance with all rules. I am a plaintiff.
The opposing counsel and the judge did not object my filing of the motion and notice of hearing.

What the judge was unhappy about it that I demanded legally valid response to production demand - meaning the response signed by defendant under oath. The response to production demand signed by defendant under oath is a synonym of verified response to production demand. Without defendant's signing the response, it can never be a verified response - unsigned oath is not an oath. In California Courts it is settled that unsigned response to discovery is not a response at all

During hearing (both parties were present, of course) the judge realized the judges mistake. The judge stated that unsigned paper is a technical violation of law.

But, instead to compel the defendant to produce a verified (signed under oath) response to production demand, the judge made a circus:
- the judge stated that the court's clerk should compel defendant's signature, not the judge;
- after realizing that he said nonsense (the clerk has no power to compel defendant to sign), the judge ventured in electronic signature speculation. I explained to the judge that paper document cannot be electronically signed.
- since non of the judges speculations worked, he simply stated that he would not allow using law bluntly in the court and would deny all my motions to compel verified (signed) responses to production demands.

Since the judge already insisted on direct violation of law, what would be a point of rehearing or reconsidering?

The court is in direct violation of law!

What can I do except the petition writ of mandamus or the appeal?
Since it is limited case, the petition writ of mandamus or the appeal will be decided by the same court. I am afraid that appeal will be decided by the same judge or a friend of the judge.

Thanks you,
Dmitriy

Thanks for the reply.

U am not as deep as you are but, I never give up.

So if what they gave you was the same as giving you nothing; don't compel them to sign the nothing.

It may not be a rule to "force to sign" as much as there is a rule to compel to produce.

In law no one can really make anyone sign a document because if they do the signature is "under coercion" and it renders the document void on its face.

Sorry but you have to see a door or another window because if you keep banging on the same door you are stuck with the sanctions.

The reason for an Opportunity to move a court to reconsider or for rehearing is for such matters where one way doesn't work but another will.

I hope.I gave you something to reconsider (pun intended)

Motion to compel them to produce with a motion for rehearing or reconsideration (may have to know what the purpose of each is for to pick the right one.

Served on the other party according to the rules, filed with the clerk.

They can file an objection, the court can decide whether to rehear or reconsider and set a date.

Try something because all your options appear to be before that court and from my experience judges try to be impartial and will not hold past errors against you as long as they see you are trying to act according to the court rules.

The rules rule.

I have never heard of anyone having power or authority to.force anyone to sign anything they refused to sign.

That may be why the rule says not signing is like not submitting at all.

I once had an opposing party served by a professional process server.

I get to court and the judge asks me if I served the other party and I said yes and he said he has no record of it being filed.

He would not let me contact the process server who had told me he filednit a week earlier.

I was told to try again and had to make the lawsuit and amended complaint and try again and ai contacted the process server who contacted the clerk.

She told him he didn't sign the service of process so she didn't file it.

So just as with him, not signing is.like not delivering it on time.

A judge can sanction a side for rule violation but it doesn't help to go into a judges playground and tell him he's not doing his job with the other side.

Only appeals has permission to tell a judge he screwed up.

If its a court of record, the.judge has to control what happens in his court and someone asking him to do something he cannot legally do would lead to sanctions for asking him to violate the law.

I hope this helps you comprehend how complicated it became but does not have to be.

If you listen to the audio portion of this course...Dr. Graves speaks about this very thing in either the Discovery portion or a couple audios after that. You'll know it when you hear him speak of it. It's very clear how it works. Maybe that will help. If fact, I have learned more fro. Dr. Graves audio's than anything, but, this was after I followed along with the info prior...the audio pulled all the other stuff into a clear picture that started making it all make sense. Dr. Graves has got this stuff down pat. In fact I have had lawyers try to talk their talk or write letters that I can now respond to both with knowledge that what they are stating to me is wrong and makes no legal argument in what they are stating. If everyone was equipped with the tools taught here.....our government would not be in the corrupt mess it is In. I can see why we are viewed as idiots and why they do what ever they want because even if most were given a second chance to go to court to give it another shot to get decision in their favor...they would lose again....because they dont know what the rules are in court that allows them to win. We should all work on getting this course available to educate people to help themselves. This is my third re-newal....and I panic when it gets close to expiring.