Ishimina Suttle et al. v. Nicole K. Whitfield

warranted here. Instead, the Court elects to increase sanctions under the monetary sanctions rung in light of the previously articulated understanding that Defendant's "clawback" argument "seeks to take documents from Plaintiff while the Court's discovery order compelled Defendant to provide information and documents in its possession." [Id. P. 20, Ex. N, p. 3.]

This understanding informs why Defendant's failure to provide sufficient responses was not justified. Plaintiff's purported possession of privileged nonparty client information is irrelevant to Defendant's production obligation; Defendant must provide responses and corresponding documents within its possession. Any attendant delay in serving the responses due to the attempted procurement of a protective order concerning documents in Plaintiff's possession is thus immaterial.

The Court therefore imposes sanctions against Defendant and its counsel of record, jointly and severally, in the amount of $6,300, reflecting 10 hours of attorney David Shein's work on the instant motion at an hourly rate of $550 plus 2 hours of attorney Nelson A. Campbell's work at an hourly rate of $400. [Shein Decl. P. 29; Campbell Decl. P.P. 2-3.] The Court finds the sanctions adequate to compensate Plaintiff for the costs and fees incurred in enforcing the Court's order.

Contrary to Defendant's claim, imposing sanctions against its counsel of record does not constitute "a sanction imposed twice against the same entity for the same conduct." Defendant is distinct from the lawyers that represent it and this is true even if those same lawyers are its employees. Plaintiff's motion is thus granted in part. The sanctions are payable to Plaintiff within 30 days.

The Court notes that both parties represent that further supplemental responses were served on August 10, 2026. The Court orders the parties to meet and confer within 10 days to address any deficiencies in these responses to prevent unnecessary motion practice. Plaintiff to give notice.

617 Date: 8-18-26 Case #: 25STCV02160 Trial Date: 11-9-26 MINOR'S COMPROMISE MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff, Ishimina Suttle RESPONDING PARTY: Unopposed/Defendant, Nicole K. Whitfield RELIEF REQUESTED Minor's Compromise

SUMMARY OF ACTION On January 24, 2025, Plaintiffs Ishimina Suttle, et al. filed the instant habitability action.

RULING: Granted. Plaintiff Ishimina Suttle submits a petition for approval for minor's compromise on behalf of 16-year-old Nyeiorre Morris. The petition indicates a settlement of $5,000 with Defendant Nicole K. Whitfield. The entire case is represented as settling for $225,000 ($71,666.67 allocated among 3 adult claimants and $5,000 for 2 minor claimants) (see Attachment 10(c)). The Court notes that item 17(a)(2) of the petition is not fully completed. Plaintiff is to submit a revised petition before the hearing completing the item and attaching any required documentation.

The Court otherwise approves the petition. The $5,000 payment may be paid directly to Ishimina Suttle, though the proposed order indicates the funds will be deposited into a bank account. (Prob. Code, Sec. 3611, subd. (e).) Plaintiff to also submit a revised proposed order reflecting the correct hearing date, department, and judicial officer. Plaintiff to give notice.

Dept. 617 Date: 8-18-26 Case #: 25STCV02160 Trial Date: 11-9-26 MINOR'S COMPROMISE MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff, Ishimina Suttle RESPONDING PARTY: Unopposed/Defendant, Nicole K. Whitfield RELIEF REQUESTED Minor's Compromise

SUMMARY OF ACTION On January 24, 2025, Plaintiffs Ishimina Suttle, et al. filed the instant habitability action.

RULING: Granted. Plaintiff Ishimina Suttle submits a petition for approval for minor's compromise on behalf of 6-year-old Royal Suttle-Raspberry. The petition indicates a settlement of $5,000 with Defendant Nicole K. Whitfield. The entire case is represented as settling for $225,000 ($71,666.67 allocated among 3 adult claimants and $5,000 for 2 minor claimants) (see Attachment 10(c)). The Court notes that item 17(a)(2) of the petition is not fully completed. Plaintiff is to submit a revised petition before the hearing completing the item and attaching any required documentation.

The Court otherwise approves the petition. The $5,000 payment may be paid directly to Ishimina Suttle, though the proposed order indicates the funds will be deposited into a bank account. (Prob. Code, Sec. 3611, subd. (e).) Plaintiff to also submit a revised proposed order reflecting the correct hearing date, department, and judicial officer. Plaintiff to give notice.

Case Number: 25STCV19056 Hearing Date: August 18, 2026 Dept: 617 Dept. 617 Date: 8-18-26 Case #: 25STCV19056 Trial Date: None Set DEMURRER WITH MOTION TO STRIKE MOVING PARTY: Defendant, Larchmont Schools RESPONDING PARTY: Plaintiffs, H.H., by and through his Guardian ad Litem, Ah Rum Choi, and R.J. and J.J., by and through their Guardian ad Litem, Ilnam Jeong RELIEF REQUESTED Demurrer to Second, Third, and Fourth Causes of Action in Complaint