UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
May 13, 2011
GREGORY GATZAS, ET AL.
WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., ET AL.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: The Honorable Dale S. Fischer, United States District Judge
Debra Plato Not Present Deputy Clerk Court Reporter Attorneys Present for Plaintiffs: Attorneys Present for Defendants: Not Present Not Present
Proceedings: (In Chambers) Order to Show Cause Why Additional Sanctions Should not be Imposed and Why Counsel Should not be Referred to the State Bar and to the Court's Standing Committee on Discipline Defendant Wells Fargo Bank filed a motion to dismiss on February 7, 2011, with a hearing date set for March 14, 2011. Opposition was due February 21, 2011. No opposition was filed. The Court deemed the lack of opposition to be consent to the motion, granted the motion, and granted leave to amend the complaint to address the deficiencies noted in the motion. The Court permitted an amended complaint to be filed and served no later than April 4, 2011.
The Court also noted that the failure of Plaintiffs' counsel to file a written statement that the motion would not be opposed violated Local Rule 7-9. Plaintiffs' counsel was ordered to show cause in writing no later than April 4, why the Court should not issue sanctions against counsel in the amount of $100 for his failure to comply with the Local Rules.
Plaintiffs' counsel filed no response to the Order to Show Cause. Therefore, on April 7, 2011, the Court ordered counsel to pay additional sanctions of $100 to the clerk of court no later than April 15.
Plaintiffs' counsel also failed to file a timely amended complaint. Had counsel reviewed the Court's General Orders and Local Rules concerning e-filing, this Court would not have had to spend time addressing the late filing of the amended complaint. In addition, counsel once again failed to comply with the Court's General Orders and Local Rules when he filed his Application for Extension of Time to Amend without a proposed order and without providing mandatory paper copies to chambers. The Court therefore sanctioned counsel in the additional amount of $100 payable to the clerk of court no later than April 15.
The Court also ordered counsel to read all of the Court's General Orders and Local Rules relating to the proper filing of documents and to submit to the Court no later than April 15 a declaration that he had done so.
The Court advised that further failures of counsel to abide by the Federal Rules, General Orders, Local Rules, or this Court's orders would result in escalating sanctions, including dismissal.
Counsel has again failed to comply with this Court's orders. He has neither paid the sanctions nor provided the required declaration. Counsel is now ordered to show cause in writing no later than May 25 why he should not be ordered to pay additional sanctions in the amount of $1,000 and why the Court should not refer him to this Court's Standing Committee on Attorney Discipline and to the State Bar of California. Plaintiffs' counsel is ordered to appear personally on June 6, 2011 at 11:00 a.m.
Payment of total sanctions of $1,200 and the filing of the required declaration no later than May 25 will be a sufficient response to this Order to Show Cause.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.